When Article 82 and Article 92 Are Charged Together, How Do Cases End?
The records include 17 Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial from 2015–2026 that charged both solicitation (Article 82) and an orders violation (Article 92). The median confinement was 10 months, shorter than the 1.3 years in all cases charging Article 82.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 4 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 82 › With Article 92
Short answer: The records include 17 Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial from 2015–2026 that charged both solicitation (Article 82) and an orders violation (Article 92). The median confinement was 10 months, shorter than the 1.3 years in all cases charging Article 82. A punitive discharge followed 65% of enlisted convictions, compared with 82%.
Shorter Confinement Than Other Solicitation Cases
Confinement was part of 65% of the 17 convictions. The median term was 10 months. In all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 82, the median was 1.3 years. Still, a quarter of the terms with confinement were 2.5 years or longer.
Each figure is the adjudged sentence from trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. The sentence covers every charge in the case.
Fewer Punitive Discharges
11 of the 17 convicted enlisted members received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (65%), less often than the 82% in all cases charging Article 82. 4 were dishonorable discharges.
A sentence without a punitive discharge can still be followed by an administrative separation, which these records do not include.
NCOs Made Up 8 of 17 Accused
9 accused were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), and 8 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9). No officers or warrant officers appear. In all cases charging Article 82, junior enlisted members were 64%, so this group is more senior.
General courts-martial made up 35% of the cases (6 of 17), and special courts-martial heard the rest. The general level can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial is capped at one year of confinement.
Pleas
Only 12 of the 17 records list a plea. Among them, 7 were guilty pleas and 5 were not-guilty or mixed pleas, which count as contested. The contested share, 42%, was higher than the 25% for all cases charging Article 82.
Drug and Obstruction Charges
Article 82 never appeared alone in this group. Across all cases charging Article 82, 5 of 158 had no other charge. Here, besides Article 92, Article 112a (drug) was charged in 9 cases, Article 131b (obstruction, numbered since 2019) in 5, Article 134 (general article) in 4, and Article 128 (assault) in 3.
Years and Rules
The first trial was in June 2015 and the last in April 2026, with no more than 3 cases in any year. 2021 had 3.
Under the Military Justice Act of 2016, effective January 1, 2019, panel sizes became fixed, judge-alone special courts-martial were created with a six-month cap and no punitive discharge, and written plea agreements began. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel decide whether to prosecute covered offenses, and new sentencing parameters apply when all guilty findings are for offenses after December 27, 2023. Offense dates are not in the records.
Limits of the Data
The records do not include verdict results for this group, the evidence, the plea terms, or cases handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Army, Navy, and Marine Corps courts-martial that charged both Article 82 and Article 92 (17 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, data updated October 24, 2026. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: how this data was built. Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.
Related Analysis
- Article 82 (Soliciting): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Article 92 (Failure to Obey Order or Regulation): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Article 82 Cases by the Numbers, 2021–2025
- Navy-Marine Corps Article 82 Cases by the Numbers, 2017–2025
- AWOL Plus Disrespect: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 86 and 89
- Article 127 Plus General Article: Courts-Martial Charging Articles 127 and 134
- Articles 107 and 115 in the Same Case: What the Records Show
- Articles 107 and 120 in the Same Case: What the Records Show
- Articles 107 and 120c in the Same Case: What the Records Show
- Search every case in 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. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.