When Article 86 and Article 91 Are Charged Together, How Do Cases End?

Trends › By Offense › Article 86 › With Article 91

Based on 20 cases · 2021–2026 · Army, Navy, and Marine Corps records · data updated October 24, 2026

A High Contested Share

The plea is listed in 19 of the 20 records. 11 accused contested at least one charge, and 8 pleaded guilty. A contested case is one in which the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge, through a not-guilty plea or a mixed plea.

The contested share was 58%. In all Army, Navy, and Marine Corps cases charging Article 86, it was 20%. That makes contested pleas much more common in this pairing than among AWOL cases in general.

Results of the Contested Cases

Full acquittals came in 9% of the 11 contested cases that reached a verdict. That is close to the 11% for all cases charging Article 86.

Another 6 contested cases ended in a partial acquittal. In a partial acquittal, the accused is found not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another.

Confinement Followed 53% of Convictions

There were 19 convictions, and 53% of them included confinement. The median confinement was 3 months. In all cases charging Article 86, the median was 4 months. A quarter of the sentences that included confinement were 6 months or longer.

These figures are adjudged sentences, meaning the sentence announced at trial. They come before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case, not only Article 86 and Article 91.

Punitive Discharges Were Less Common

Of 18 enlisted members convicted, 7 received a bad-conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge (39%). In all cases charging Article 86, the rate was 62%. Only 1 of the 7 was a dishonorable discharge.

A punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge for enlisted members. A sentence without one does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not include. The officer equivalent of a punitive discharge is a dismissal, but no officers appear among the accused in this pairing.

More NCOs Than Usual

Among the accused with rank recorded, 11 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9) and 8 were junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4). No officers or warrant officers appear. In all cases charging Article 86, junior enlisted members were 73% of the accused, so this group is more senior.

Court level is recorded for most cases: 4 general courts-martial and 14 special courts-martial, with 2 not listed. The general court-martial share was 22%, about the same as the 21% in all cases charging Article 86. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial is limited to one year of confinement and cannot adjudge a dishonorable discharge.

Other Charges Filed in These Cases

Every case included at least one charge besides Article 86. After Article 91, the most common were Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 7 cases, Article 89 (disrespect) in 7, Article 112a (drug) in 6, and Article 107 (false official statement) in 5.

Each sentence reflects all of the charges in its case, so these companion charges are part of the confinement and discharge figures above.

Years and Locations

The 20 cases were tried from January 2021 through July 2026. All of them were tried in 2021 or later. There were 5 in 2021, 2 in 2022, 4 in 2023, 2 in 2024, 4 in 2025, and 3 in 2026, which is a partial year.

Fort Riley had 3 cases. San Diego, California, Fort Sill, and Wheeler Army Airfield had 2 each, and Fort Campbell had 1. These five locations account for 50% of the 20 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every type, so these counts do not show where this conduct happens more often.

Rules in Effect and Limits of the Records

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence under new sentencing parameters.

The records give trial dates but not offense dates, so trials from 2024 on include cases under the old and new rules. The records also do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled outside a court-martial.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 86 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

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.