> ## 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.

# Comparing Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona and Holloman AFB, New Mexico: Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2018
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/davis-monthan-afb-arizona-vs-holloman-afb-new-mexico-2016-2018/
- Published: 2026-10-30T05:29:48.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T05:29:48.000Z
- Description: Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona and Holloman AFB, New Mexico each tried a small number of Air Force cases from 2016–2018: 35 and 34.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona, Holloman AFB, New Mexico, Air Force

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) › [Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-davis-monthan-afb-arizona/) › vs. Holloman AFB, New Mexico

**Short answer:** Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona and Holloman AFB, New Mexico each tried a small number of Air Force cases from 2016–2018: 35 and 34\. 20% of convicted enlisted members at Davis-Monthan received a punitive discharge, compared with 44% at Holloman, and Article 134 (the general article) was charged in 23% of Davis-Monthan cases, compared with 6% at Holloman.

Based on 35 cases · 2016–2018 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Punitive Discharges Were Less Common

6 of 30 convicted enlisted members at Davis-Monthan received a punitive discharge: 4 bad-conduct discharges and 2 dishonorable discharges. That is 20%. At Holloman, the share was 44%.

A punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge for an enlisted member, and a dismissal for an officer. 1 convicted officer or warrant officer appears in the Davis-Monthan records, and none was dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

## Drug Charges at Both Bases

31 of the 35 Davis-Monthan records list the charges. A case with three articles appears in three rows of the table.

Article 112a (wrongful use or possession of controlled substances) was charged in 81% of cases at both installations. It was by far the most common charge at each.

Article 134 (the general article) was charged in 23% of Davis-Monthan cases and 6% of Holloman cases. Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) was charged in 13% against 3%. Article 128 (assault) was charged in 13% against 12%. The remaining articles in the table each appear in 1 Davis-Monthan case.

| UCMJ Article                                                                                                                                       | Cases | Share here | Share, the Holloman AFB, New Mexico cases |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ---------- | ----------------------------------------- |
| [Art. 112a](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-112a-drug-offenses/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 25    | 81%        | 81%                                       |
| [Art. 134](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com) General article                           | 7     | 23%        | 6%                                        |
| [Art. 128](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-128/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Assault                                   | 4     | 13%        | 12%                                       |
| [Art. 92](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-92/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Failure to obey order or regulation         | 4     | 13%        | 3%                                        |
| Art. 111 Drunken or reckless driving                                                                                                               | 1     | 3%         | 6%                                        |
| [Art. 107](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-107/?ref=bodiesburied.com) False official statements                 | 1     | 3%         | 3%                                        |
| [Art. 120c](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-120c/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Other sexual misconduct                 | 1     | 3%         | 0%                                        |
| [Art. 90](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-90/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Willfully disobeying superior officer       | 1     | 3%         | 0%                                        |

## Short Sentences at Both Installations

31 Davis-Monthan cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 24 of those sentences included confinement (77%). The median confinement was 3 months, about the same as the 2 months at Holloman.

Only 1 of 31 Davis-Monthan convictions carried more than one year of confinement (3%), against 6% at Holloman. Sentences under 6 months made up 61% of Davis-Monthan convictions and 66% of Holloman convictions. No sentence at either installation reached 5 years. 23% of Davis-Monthan convictions carried no confinement, about the same as the 22% at Holloman. Sentences of 6 months to 1 year made up 13% at Davis-Monthan and 6% at Holloman.

These are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial and before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. They cover every charge in the case.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, the Holloman AFB, New Mexico cases |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ----------------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 7           | 23%        | 22%                                       |
| Under 6 months                  | 19          | 61%        | 66%                                       |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 4           | 13%        | 6%                                        |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 1           | 3%         | 6%                                        |
| 5 years or more                 | 0           | 0%         | 0%                                        |

## Full Acquittals Measured Against All Cases

4 of the 35 Davis-Monthan cases ended in a full acquittal (11%), meaning not guilty of every charge. At Holloman, the share was 6%.

These rates use all cases as the base, not only contested cases. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list the plea when the accused pleaded guilty, so the number of contested cases cannot be counted reliably for these years. A contested case is one where the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge, and most acquittal rates on this site use contested cases as the base.

## Members Decided Most Cases

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. At Davis-Monthan, a military judge alone decided 12 of the 35 cases (34%).

Members heard the other 23: 5 enlisted panels and 18 officer panels. Officer panels were the most common forum at Davis-Monthan in these years.

## Court Level and Rank

Davis-Monthan held 8 general courts-martial and 27 special courts-martial. The general share was 23%, against 15% at Holloman. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 74% of the accused at Davis-Monthan, NCOs 23%, and officers 3%. At Holloman, junior enlisted members made up 88%.

| Installation               | Cases | Contested | Full acquittals (decided contested) | Median confinement | Punitive discharge (enlisted) |
| -------------------------- | ----- | --------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------------ | ----------------------------- |
| Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona | 35    | —         | —                                   | 3 months           | 20%                           |
| Holloman AFB, New Mexico   | 34    | —         | —                                   | 2 months           | 44%                           |

## Cases by Year

The Davis-Monthan records run from June 2016 through November 2018\. By year: 2016: 8, 2017: 12, 2018: 15\. With 35 cases in total, a few cases can change any share on this page by several points.

## Before the 2019 Changes

All of these trials came before the Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019\. That law later set fixed panel sizes, created judge-alone special courts-martial capped at six months with no punitive discharge, and brought in written plea agreements. None of that applied to these cases.

## What the Air Force Records Do Not Show

The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or plea terms, and they do not include nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.

Air Force records rarely list charges in cases that ended in a full acquittal, and they never report plea agreements. From 2016 to 2019, they rarely list a guilty plea.

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

### How We Counted

Every court-martial tried at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona (35) and Holloman AFB, New Mexico (34) with trial dates in 2016–2018\. Each figure for Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona is set beside the same figure for Holloman AFB, New Mexico.

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

- [Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona: Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-davis-monthan-afb-arizona/) (hub)
- [Holloman AFB, New Mexico: Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-holloman-afb-new-mexico/) (hub)
- [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) (hub)
- [Comparing Dyess AFB, Texas and JB Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii: Air Force Courts-Martial, 2019–2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/dyess-afb-texas-vs-jb-pearl-harbor-hickam-hawaii-2019-2023/)
- [JB McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, New Jersey and Ramstein AB, Germany, 2019–2023: How Their Courts-Martial Compare](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/jb-mcguire-dix-lakehurst-new-jersey-vs-ramstein-ab-germany-2019-2023/)
- [Nellis AFB, Nevada and Minot AFB, North Dakota, 2019–2023: How Their Courts-Martial Compare](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/nellis-afb-nevada-vs-minot-afb-north-dakota-2019-2023/)
- [Bremerton, Washington vs. Camp Pendleton, California: Two Navy-Marine Corps Installations Side by Side, 2013–2018](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/bremerton-washington-vs-camp-pendleton-california-2013-2018/)
- [Bremerton, Washington vs. Okinawa, Japan: Two Navy-Marine Corps Installations Side by Side, 2019–2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/bremerton-washington-vs-okinawa-japan-2019-2023/)
- [Camp Humphreys and Fort Riley, 2024–2026: How Their Courts-Martial Compare](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/camp-humphreys-vs-fort-riley-2024-2026/)
- [Camp Lejeune, North Carolina and Norfolk, Virginia, 2024–2026: How Their Courts-Martial Compare](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/camp-lejeune-north-carolina-vs-norfolk-virginia-2024-2026/)
- [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members)

## Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona, 2016–2018

- [John C. Degnan](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-john-c-degnan/)
- [Bryon T. Gleisner](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-bryon-t-gleisner/)
- [Ryan A. Hendricks](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-ryan-a-hendricks/)
- [Joseph S. Imburgia](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-joseph-s-imburgia/)
- [Andrew Kalavanos](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-andrew-kalavanos/)
- [Mark W. Milam](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-mark-w-milam/)
- [Bradley A. Morris](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-bradley-a-morris/)
- [Jennifer E. Powell](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-jennifer-e-powell/)
- [Lyndell M. Powell](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-lyndell-m-powell/)
- [Natalie D. Richardson](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-natalie-d-richardson/)
- [Mark F. Rosenow](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-mark-f-rosenow/)
- [Shelly W. Schools](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-shelly-w-schools/)
- [Christopher M. Schumann](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-christopher-m-schumann/)
- [Brendon K. Tukey](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-brendon-k-tukey/)
- [Charles E. Wiedie Jr.](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-charles-e-wiedie-jr/)

Names and links only. Each judge's record of pleas, findings, and sentences is on their Know Your Judge page, part of the [Court-Martial Characters](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judges/) membership.

**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.