> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Articles 129 and 92 in the Same Case: What the Records Show
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-129-and-article-92-charged-together/
- Published: 2026-10-30T08:15:36.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T08:15:36.000Z
- Description: The records hold 25 Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial from 2021–2025 that charged both Article 129 (burglary and unlawful entry) and Article 92 (orders violation).
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Article 129, Article 92

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Offense](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-offense/) › [Article 129](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-129-courts-martial/) › With Article 92

**Short answer:** The records hold 25 Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial from 2021–2025 that charged both Article 129 (burglary and unlawful entry) and Article 92 (orders violation). None of the 11 contested cases ended in a full acquittal, compared with 15% in all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 129\. 65% of convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge, lower than the 76% in that group.

Based on 25 cases · 2021–2025 · Army, Navy, and Marine Corps records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Every Case Ended in a Conviction

All 25 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge. 11 accused had entered not-guilty or mixed pleas, and 14 pleaded guilty. The contested share of 44% was higher than the 36% in all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 129.

Of the 11 contested cases, 0 ended in a full acquittal, against 15% in the comparison group. 6 of the 11 (55%) ended in a partial acquittal, meaning not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another.

## Confinement Was Not Imposed in 7 Convictions

18 of the 25 sentences included confinement (72%). The median term was 8 months, shorter than the 9 months in all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 129.

7 convictions (28%) brought no confinement, compared with 13% in the comparison group. At the other end, 7 of 25 convictions (28%) brought more than 1 year, against 31%. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 129 |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |
| No confinement                  | 7           | 28%        | 13%                                                                |
| Under 6 months                  | 8           | 32%        | 24%                                                                |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 3           | 12%        | 32%                                                                |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 4           | 16%        | 18%                                                                |
| 5 years or more                 | 3           | 12%        | 13%                                                                |

## General and Special Courts-Martial Compared

14 cases went to a general court-martial (56%) and 11 to a special court-martial. The 14 general courts-martial had a median confinement of 1.2 years, and 64% were contested. The 11 special courts-martial had a median of 3 months, and 18% were contested.

A special court-martial is limited to 1 year of confinement and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

## Punitive Discharges

65% of the enlisted convictions ended with a punitive discharge: 13 bad-conduct discharges and 2 dishonorable discharges. In all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 129, the share was 76%. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

## Other Charges

None of the 25 cases charged burglary or unlawful entry by itself, compared with 10 of 127 in the comparison group. Besides Article 92 (orders violation) in all 25, the most common charges were Article 128 (assault) in 8 cases, and Article 107 (false official statement), Article 121 (larceny), and Article 134 (general article) in 7 each.

## Rank and Installations

Among the accused with rank recorded, 16 were junior enlisted members and 7 were NCOs. No officers appear. This group was more senior than all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 129.

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, had the most cases (6), followed by Norfolk, Virginia (4), Quantico, Virginia (3), Fort Wainwright (2), and Fort Benning (2). Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count does not by itself show a higher rate.

## Years, Rule Changes, and Limits

There were 10 cases in 2021, 3 in 2022, 9 in 2023, 2 in 2024, and 1 in 2025\. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel decide whether to prosecute covered offenses, and new sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023\. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so the later trials may mix both sets of rules.

The evidence, the plea terms, and conduct handled outside a court-martial are not in the records.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/).

### How We Counted

Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial that charged both Article 129 and Article 92 (25 cases). Air Force cases are left out because Air Force records rarely list the charges in acquittals.

Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.

## Related Analysis

- [Article 129 (Burglary Before 2019, Burglary and Unlawful Entry Since): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-129-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [Article 92 (Failure to Obey Order or Regulation): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-92-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [Burglary And Unlawful Entry Plus General Article: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 129 and 134](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-129-and-article-134-charged-together/)
- [Burglary And Unlawful Entry Plus Attempt: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 129 and 80](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-129-and-article-80-charged-together/)
- [How Has Article 129 Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-129-trend-2021-2025/)
- [How Has Article 129 Changed in Navy-Marine Corps Courts-Martial Since 2021?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-129-trend-2021-2025/)
- [AWOL Plus Disrespect: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 86 and 89](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-86-and-article-89-charged-together/)
- [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members)

**About the author.** Jocelyn C. Stewart is a retired Army JAG with more than 24 years of trying courts-martial and more than 200 jury trials. She hosts *Where All The Bodies Are Buried* and runs the [Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.