Child Pornography: Courts-Martial at Minot AFB vs. Federal Court in the District of North Dakota
Air Force courts-martial at Minot AFB, North Dakota resulted in 10 convictions for child pornography (images of child exploitation) for trials from 2020 to 2025, with a median adjudged confinement of 21.7 months. Federal court in the District of North Dakota sentenced 105 people under the matching g
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 8 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Child Pornography Sentences › Child Pornography: Minot AFB
In brief: Air Force courts-martial at Minot AFB, North Dakota resulted in 10 convictions for child pornography (images of child exploitation) for trials from 2020 to 2025, with a median adjudged confinement of 21.7 months. Federal court in the District of North Dakota sentenced 105 people under the matching guideline in fiscal years 2016 to 2025, and the median prison term was 108 months, or 9 years. The 105 federal cases span the whole district and mostly involved people outside the military.
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 105 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal years 2016 to 2025, compared with court-martial results from this site's Military Trial Results data (updated November 2, 2026). Acquittals and dismissals come from a second source, the Federal Judicial Center's records of 753,808 federal defendants whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025. It is part of the Federal Prosecution Analysis series, which builds on Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System. How the numbers were built: How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built.
Dishonorable Discharges at Minot
Of the 9 enlisted airmen convicted, all 9 received a punitive discharge. The records show 8 dishonorable discharges and 1 bad-conduct discharge. The 1 officer convicted received a dismissal.
All 10 convictions were at a general court-martial, and all 10 sentences recorded included confinement. These are 10 cases, a small count that cannot show a trend.
Which Cases Are in Each Count?
The court-martial records list the trial location as "Minot AFB, North Dakota". Every conviction in the count was an Air Force case.
Minot AFB is in the federal District of North Dakota. The 105 federal sentences are every case under guideline §2G2.2 in that district. They are not cases from the base, and the data does not suggest the base's cases would have gone to federal court.
Confinement Compared With Federal Prison Terms
The Minot median of 21.7 months was about the same as the 22.5-month median for all 491 court-martial convictions for this offense. A quarter at Minot received 38.6 months or more.
In federal court, all 105 people received a prison term. The district median of 108 months was higher than the 90-month median for all 13,646 people sentenced across federal districts. A quarter in the district received 168 months or more, and a quarter received 72 months or less.
| Courts-martial at Minot AFB | Federal court, District of North Dakota | |
|---|---|---|
| Convictions or people sentenced | 10 | 105 |
| Sentenced to confinement or prison | 100% | 100% |
| Median confinement or prison | 21.7 months | 108 months |
| A quarter received this or more | 38.6 months | 168 months |
| Pleaded guilty | 9 of 10 with a plea recorded (90%) | more than 99% |
| Mandatory minimum applied | See the caveats | 73 of 105 with the information (70%) |
Pleas and Trials
Guilty pleas accounted for 9 of the 10 Minot convictions with a plea recorded (90%), with a median confinement of 23.7 months. The 1 contested case that ended in conviction carried 13.8 months.
In North Dakota federal court, 104 of 105 people (more than 99%) pleaded guilty. More than 99% of those pleas came with a written plea agreement. The median prison term after a guilty plea was 108 months, and the 1 person convicted at trial received 180 months.
Mandatory Minimums and the Guideline Range
A mandatory minimum prison term applied to 73 people in the district (70%). For courts-martial, the table refers to the caveats instead of giving a figure.
Within-range sentences were 43% (45). Below the range without a government request were 33% (35), below it at the government's request 22% (23), and above it 2% (2).
Supervision, Restitution, and Criminal History
All 105 were ordered to serve supervised release after prison, with a median term of 120 months. For 18 people (17%), supervised release was for life.
Restitution was ordered for 68 people (65%). No one in the district was fined (0%).
Federal records put 59% of the district's defendants in criminal history category I and 5% in category VI. Court-martial records have no criminal history field, so this cannot be compared.
What the Records Cannot Show
Court-martial figures are adjudged sentences, taken before clemency or appeal. Federal figures are imposed prison terms, not time served. Military years are by trial date; the federal fiscal year runs from October 1 to September 30.
No case facts are in either data set. The numbers cannot explain any individual sentence or the reasons behind the differences.
How We Counted
Courts-martial with trial dates in 2016 to 2025 whose recorded trial location is Minot AFB, North Dakota, ending in a conviction for child pornography (images of child exploitation): possession, receipt, or distribution (10). Federal: people sentenced in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 in the District of North Dakota (U.S. Sentencing Commission district label "North Dakota") under primary sentencing guideline §2G2.2 (possessing, receiving, or distributing child pornography; 18 U.S.C. 2252 and 2252A) (105). The installation is matched to the federal district for the county where it sits.
Federal fiscal years run from October 1 to September 30. No person, judge, or lawyer is identified in any of these records.
What to Keep in Mind
Who is in each set of numbers. The federal sentencing numbers come from the U.S. Sentencing Commission. They count only people who were convicted and sentenced in federal district court. People whose cases were dismissed or who were acquitted are not in them. The military numbers come from court-martial results, which include acquittals. To compare acquittal or dismissal rates, the federal side uses a different source: the Federal Judicial Center's case data, which counts every defendant whose case ended.
Different cases reach each system. Federal prosecutors bring a narrow set of cases. In fiscal year 2024, immigration and drug trafficking cases were 59% of everyone sentenced in federal court (36,664 of 61,678). Many crimes that the military prosecutes, such as most assaults, most sexual assaults between adults, and drug use, are usually state crimes for civilians and reach federal court only in special situations, such as on federal land or in Indian Country. A federal case and a court-martial for the same crime can involve different kinds of facts.
No parole in federal prison; credit for good conduct. Federal prison has no parole for crimes committed on or after November 1, 1987. A federal prisoner can earn up to 54 days of good conduct credit for each year of the sentence the judge imposed, which is about 15%. Some federal prisoners can also earn First Step Act time credits, but many offenses make a person ineligible. The numbers in this post are the sentences judges imposed, not the time people actually served.
Military confinement credit and parole. For military sentences adjudged after 2004, good conduct time is 5 days for each month of confinement, about 16%. Military prisoners can also earn up to 8 more days a month for work and programs and up to 2 days a month for special acts, with a limit of 15 days a month in total. Military prisoners can be considered for parole by their service's clemency and parole board. The military numbers in this post are the confinement adjudged at trial, not the time served.
Military sentences include punishments federal sentences do not. A court-martial sentence can include a punitive discharge (bad-conduct discharge, dishonorable discharge, or dismissal for officers), reduction in rank, and forfeiture of pay. These have no federal counterpart. A comparison of months of confinement leaves them out. A short confinement term combined with a dishonorable discharge is a heavier sentence than the months alone show.
Time periods. Federal numbers are by federal fiscal year (October 1 to September 30), based on the sentencing date. The military numbers are by trial date. Neither source has the date of the offense, so a change in law shows up in either data set gradually.
Offense categories do not line up exactly. Each comparison uses a federal offense group chosen to match the military article as closely as possible (see the crosswalk). Some matches are close; others are partial. The post says which federal guideline or statute was used and why it is not an exact match.
Mandatory minimum sentences. Many federal statutes on drugs, images of child exploitation, child sex abuse, and firearms carry mandatory minimum prison terms. The UCMJ has mandatory minimums only for a few offenses (a dishonorable discharge or dismissal for rape and sexual assault, and life for premeditated murder). Federal sentences for these offenses are partly set by Congress, not by the judge.
Related Analysis
- Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System (the background article)
- Federal Prosecution Analysis (all federal posts)
- How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built (sources and method)
- Child Pornography Sentences: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial, 2016–2025 (overview)
- Federal Sentences in the District of North Dakota, FY2016–2025 (the federal district)
- Child Pornography: Courts-Martial at Bremerton vs. Federal Court in the Western District of Washington (other installations)
- Child Pornography: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina (other installations)
- Child Pornography: Courts-Martial at Camp Pendleton vs. Federal Court in the Southern District of California (other installations)
- Child Pornography: Courts-Martial at Fort Bragg vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina (other installations)
- Child Pornography: Federal Sentences vs. Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025
- Child Pornography: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial
- Child Pornography: Federal Sentences vs. Marine Corps Courts-Martial
- Fewer or More? General Article Charges at Army Courts-Martial, 2021–2025 (court-martial data)
- What Sentence Follows an Army General Article Conviction? (court-martial data)
- Fighting an Army General Article Charge: How Contested Cases Ended (court-martial data)
- Guilty Pleas in Army General Article Cases: How Often, and What Came Next (court-martial data)
- Air Force Article 134 Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025 (court-martial data)
- What Sentence Follows an Air Force General Article Conviction? (court-martial data)
- Guilty Pleas in Air Force General Article Cases: How Often, and What Came Next (court-martial data)
- Is Navy-Marine Corps General Article Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 134, 2017–2025 (court-martial data)
- What Sentence Follows a Navy-Marine Corps General Article Conviction? (court-martial data)
- Not Guilty Pleas in Navy-Marine Corps Article 134 Cases: What Happened at Trial (court-martial data)
- When Navy-Marine Corps Accused Plead Guilty to General Article (court-martial data)
- Article 134 (General Article): Court-Martial Data and Trends (court-martial data)
- Article 134 UCMJ: The General Article (law firm reference page)
- U.S. Sentencing Commission, Individual Offender Datafiles (source)
- Federal Judicial Center, Integrated Database (criminal defendants) (source)
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.