> ## 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. # Child Pornography: Sentences After a Guilty Plea vs. After Trial, Federal Court and Courts-Martial - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-plea-vs-trial-sentences/ - Published: 2026-11-03T01:38:15.000Z - Updated: 2026-11-03T01:38:15.000Z - Description: In federal court, the median prison term was 87 months after a guilty plea and 170 months after a trial. In courts-martial for child pornography (images of child exploitation), the median confinement was 20 months after a guilty plea and 24 months in contested cases that ended in conviction. The gap - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Federal [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [Federal Prosecution Analysis](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal/) › [Child Pornography Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-sentences-vs-courts-martial/) › Child Pornography: Plea vs. Trial **In brief:** In federal court, the median prison term was 87 months after a guilty plea and 170 months after a trial. In courts-martial for child pornography (images of child exploitation), the median confinement was 20 months after a guilty plea and 24 months in contested cases that ended in conviction. The gap between plea and trial is much larger in federal court. Updated November 2, 2026 · Sources: U.S. Sentencing Commission and Federal Judicial Center, fiscal years 2016–2025 · Military Trial Results This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 13,646 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](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal/) series, which builds on [Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/military-sentencing-guidelines-federal-system/). How the numbers were built: [How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-data-methodology/). ## What Is the Federal Gap Between Plea and Trial? The U.S. Sentencing Commission data covers 13,646 people sentenced under guideline §2G2.2 in fiscal years 2016 to 2025\. Of those, 97% pleaded guilty. The median prison term after a guilty plea was 87 months. After a trial, the median prison term was 170 months. That figure is based on 419 people convicted at trial and sent to prison. In the federal data, a person counts as going to trial even if they pleaded guilty to some counts and went to trial on others. ## What Is the Court-Martial Gap? Court-martial records have 337 convictions after a guilty plea and 86 in contested cases for child pornography: possession, receipt, or distribution. The trial dates run from 2016 to 2025\. A court-martial is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The median confinement after a guilty plea was 20 months, based on 334 cases with confinement. In contested cases that ended in conviction, it was 24 months, based on 83 cases. The contested median is higher, but the difference is small. ## How Does Each Service Compare? The service table shows a different pattern in each branch. The Army has the largest gap: 16.8 months after a guilty plea and 42 months in contested cases. The Air Force medians are close, at 23.7 months and 24 months. The Navy figures are 20 months and 23.5 months. The Marine Corps figures are 22 months and 27 months. The Army contested figure rests on only 10 cases with confinement, so it can change a great deal with a few cases. | Service | Median confinement after a guilty plea (cases) | Median confinement, contested cases (cases) | | ------------ | ---------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- | | Army | 16.8 months (121) | 42 months (10) | | Air Force | 23.7 months (82) | 24 months (33) | | Navy | 20 months (54) | 23.5 months (20) | | Marine Corps | 22 months (77) | 27 months (20) | ## How Do Federal Sentences Compare With the Guideline Range? Federal records show where each sentence fell against the guideline range. A sentence within the range applied to 32%. A sentence below the range at the government's request applied to 24%, and below the range without a government request applied to 41%. A sentence above the range applied to 3%. These figures cover all 13,646 people, not just those who pleaded guilty. Court-martial records do not report a comparable measure. ## What Do the Records Not Show? The comparison does not show that a trial causes a longer sentence. Cases that go to trial may differ from cases that end in a plea in ways the records do not capture, including the facts and the charges. Court-martial sentences are as adjudged at trial, before any clemency or appeal. Federal prison terms are the terms imposed, not time served. The military and federal systems also use different sentencing rules, and a court-martial has no mandatory minimum data in these records. A reader should therefore treat each pair of medians as a description of its own system. ### How We Counted Courts-martial: convictions for child pornography (images of child exploitation): possession, receipt, or distribution with trial dates in 2016 to 2025, split by plea (337 guilty pleas, 86 contested). Medians use cases with confinement adjudged. Federal: 13,646 people sentenced under primary sentencing guideline §2G2.2 (possessing, receiving, or distributing child pornography; 18 U.S.C. 2252 and 2252A), fiscal years 2016 to 2025 (U.S. Sentencing Commission). 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. **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. **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. **Federal supervised release.** Most federal prison sentences are followed by a term of supervised release that the judge sets as part of the sentence. A person who violates it can be sent back to prison. A court-martial cannot sentence anyone to supervision after release. Military parole and mandatory supervised release are decided later by a board, not by the judge at trial. **Who decides the sentence, and under what rules.** Federal judges sentence every federal case. They must calculate the Sentencing Guidelines range, which is advisory, and must impose any mandatory minimum the statute requires unless an exception applies. In courts-martial, the accused could choose sentencing by members until the rules changed. For cases in which every guilty finding is for an offense committed after December 27, 2023, a military judge sentences alone, within sentencing parameters. Courts-martial tried in 2024 and later include both old-rule and new-rule cases, and the data cannot tell them apart. **How life sentences and "time served" are counted.** In the federal numbers, a life sentence is counted as 470 months, and any other sentence longer than 470 months is counted as just under 470 months. A sentence of "time served" is counted as one day (0.03 months). Averages are affected by these rules; medians much less. **Plea agreements work differently.** In federal court, most plea agreements do not bind the judge on the sentence. Since 2019, a military plea agreement can set a minimum and maximum sentence that the military judge must follow if the judge accepts the agreement. The federal numbers count anyone who pleaded guilty, with or without a written agreement. **How "plea" and "trial" are counted.** In the federal sentencing numbers, "trial" means the person was convicted after a trial, including people who pleaded guilty to some counts and went to trial on others. People acquitted at trial are not in these numbers at all (see "Who is in each set of numbers"). In the federal case data, the trial rate counts both convictions and acquittals at trial among all defendants whose cases ended, including dismissed cases. Military numbers count contested cases that reached a verdict. These denominators are not the same, and each post states the one it uses. ## Related Analysis - [Military Moves Toward Sentencing Guidelines to Mirror the Federal System](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/military-sentencing-guidelines-federal-system/) (the background article) - [Federal Prosecution Analysis](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal/) (all federal posts) - [How the Federal Comparison Data Was Built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-data-methodology/) (sources and method) - [Child Pornography Sentences: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-sentences-vs-courts-martial/) (overview) - [Child Pornography Sentences Since the 2023 Military Sentencing Reform: What the Data Shows So Far](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-2023-sentencing-reform-so-far/) - [Child Pornography Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Army Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-acquittal-rate-vs-army/) - [Child Pornography Charges: How Often Federal Trials and Courts-Martial End in Acquittal](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-acquittal-rate-vs-courts-martial/) - [Child Pornography Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Marine Corps Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-acquittal-rate-vs-marine-corps/) - [Child Pornography Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Navy Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-acquittal-rate-vs-navy/) - [Guilty Pleas in Child Pornography Cases: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-guilty-plea-rate-vs-courts-martial/) - [Are Courts-Martial More Likely to End in Acquittal Than Federal Trials?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-trial-acquittal-rates-vs-courts-martial/) (related comparison) - [Guilty Pleas in Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial, Year by Year](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-guilty-plea-rates-vs-courts-martial/) (related comparison) - [Federal Law Has No Crime of Drug Use: How Article 112a Cases Compare](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-no-crime-of-drug-use-article-112a/) (related comparison) - [Drug Distribution and Importation: Federal vs. Court-Martial Sentences, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-drug-distribution-importation-vs-article-112a/) (related comparison) - [Sexual Abuse of an Adult: Federal Cases vs. Article 120 Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-sexual-abuse-adult-vs-article-120/) (related comparison) - [Child Sexual Abuse and Enticement: Federal Cases vs. Article 120b Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-sexual-abuse-enticement-vs-article-120b/) (related comparison) - [Theft and Fraud by Dollar Loss: Federal Sentences vs. Article 121 Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-theft-fraud-dollar-loss-vs-article-121/) (related comparison) - [Fewer or More? General Article Charges at Army Courts-Martial, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-trend-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [What Sentence Follows an Army General Article Conviction?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-sent-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Fighting an Army General Article Charge: How Contested Cases Ended](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-acq-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Guilty Pleas in Army General Article Cases: How Often, and What Came Next](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-plea-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Air Force Article 134 Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-trend-2016-2025/) (court-martial data) - [What Sentence Follows an Air Force General Article Conviction?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-sent-2016-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Guilty Pleas in Air Force General Article Cases: How Often, and What Came Next](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-134-plea-2016-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Is Navy-Marine Corps General Article Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 134, 2017–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-134-trend-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [What Sentence Follows a Navy-Marine Corps General Article Conviction?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-134-sent-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Not Guilty Pleas in Navy-Marine Corps Article 134 Cases: What Happened at Trial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-134-acq-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [When Navy-Marine Corps Accused Plead Guilty to General Article](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-134-plea-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Article 134 (General Article): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-134-courts-martial/) (court-martial data) - [Article 134 UCMJ: The General Article](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com) (law firm reference page) - [U.S. Sentencing Commission, Individual Offender Datafiles](https://www.ussc.gov/research/datafiles/commission-datafiles?ref=bodiesburied.com) (source) - [Federal Judicial Center, Integrated Database (criminal defendants)](https://www.fjc.gov/research/idb?ref=bodiesburied.com) (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](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.