Drug Possession: Courts-Martial at Nellis AFB vs. Federal Court in the District of Nevada
In the District of Nevada, 17 people were sentenced in federal court for simple possession under 21 U.S.C. 844 in fiscal years 2016 to 2023, and 12 of them (71%) received probation only. At Nellis AFB, 16 Air Force courts-martial with trial dates from 2017 to 2023 ended in a conviction for drug poss
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 8 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Federal Law Has No Crime of Drug Use › Drug Possession: Nellis AFB
In brief: In the District of Nevada, 17 people were sentenced in federal court for simple possession under 21 U.S.C. 844 in fiscal years 2016 to 2023, and 12 of them (71%) received probation only. At Nellis AFB, 16 Air Force courts-martial with trial dates from 2017 to 2023 ended in a conviction for drug possession (Article 112a wrongful possession), and 13 of those sentences (81%) included confinement. The federal cases are from the whole district, not the base, and most did not involve service members.
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 17 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.
Probation Only in Most Nevada Federal Cases
The federal group is small. Of the 17 people sentenced, 5 (29%) received a prison term and 12 received probation only, with no prison or other confinement.
For those sent to prison, the records report a median term of 0 months. A quarter received 0 months or more, and a quarter received 0 months or less. Across all federal districts, the median prison term for this offense was 6 months, based on 6,268 people sentenced.
Fines were ordered for 8 people (47%), and no restitution was ordered. Supervised release after prison was ordered for 1 person, with a term of 12 months.
Confinement at Nellis AFB
The records list the trial location as "Nellis AFB, Nevada". All 16 convictions were Air Force cases.
Confinement was part of 13 of the 16 sentences. The median adjudged confinement was 6.2 months, and a quarter received 11.8 months or more. Across all courts-martial for this offense in the data, the 327 convictions had a median confinement of 3.9 months. The Nellis median was higher.
Trials in 2016 to 2019 had a median confinement of 7.4 months across 10 cases. Trials in 2020 to 2025 had a median of 6.2 months across 3 cases. These small groups do not show a trend.
| Courts-martial at Nellis AFB | Federal court, District of Nevada | |
|---|---|---|
| Convictions or people sentenced | 16 | 17 |
| Sentenced to confinement or prison | 81% | 29% |
| Median confinement or prison | 6.2 months | 0 months |
| A quarter received this or more | 11.8 months | 0 months |
| Pleaded guilty | 4 of 7 with a plea recorded (4 of 7) | 100% |
| Mandatory minimum applied | See the caveats | 0 of 17 with the information (0%) |
Discharges, Court Level, and Pleas
Of the 15 enlisted members convicted, 13 (87%) received a punitive discharge. These were 11 bad-conduct discharges and 2 dishonorable discharges. The 1 officer convicted was dismissed.
A general court-martial heard 7 of the 16 cases (44%).
A plea was recorded for only 7 of the 16 convictions, and 4 of those 7 were guilty pleas. The median confinement after a guilty plea was 6.2 months, based on 3 cases. The 1 contested conviction with confinement had 11.8 months. Too few pleas were recorded to describe how pleas compared with contested cases.
How Federal Cases Ended in Nevada
All 17 people pleaded guilty, and none was convicted after a trial. Every guilty plea came with a written plea agreement. No mandatory minimum prison term applied in any of these cases.
The guidelines recommend a sentencing range for each federal case. All 16 sentences with that information were within the range.
The Base and the District Are Separate
Nellis AFB is in the federal District of Nevada. The 17 federal cases are district cases. They did not come from the installation, and most did not involve service members. Courts-martial are tried in military courts, not in the district court, and the data does not show where any Nellis case would have been tried otherwise.
The counts also differ in what they cover. The federal side counts people sentenced under 21 U.S.C. 844 under any guideline. The military side counts court-martial convictions for wrongful possession.
What the Records Do Not Show
Court-martial sentences are adjudged at trial and come before any clemency or appeal. Federal prison terms are terms imposed, not time served. The military figures follow trial dates by calendar year, and federal fiscal years run from October 1 to September 30.
Federal records place 81% of these Nevada defendants in criminal history category I. There is no criminal history field in court-martial records. With 16 and 17 cases, each count is small enough that a few sentences can change the medians.
How We Counted
Courts-martial with trial dates in 2016 to 2025 whose recorded trial location is Nellis AFB, Nevada, ending in a conviction for drug possession (Article 112a wrongful possession; federal simple possession, 21 U.S.C. 844) (16). Federal: people sentenced in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 in the District of Nevada (U.S. Sentencing Commission district label "Nevada") under a conviction under 21 U.S.C. 844 (simple possession), any guideline (17). 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.
Drug use has no federal counterpart. Federal law does not make drug use a crime. A positive drug test is not a federal offense; a civilian can be charged only with possessing the drug. Bringing drugs onto a military installation is also a military-only offense. For these, the nearest federal charge is simple possession, and the post says that the match is not exact.
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)
- Federal Law Has No Crime of Drug Use: How Article 112a Cases Compare (overview)
- Federal Sentences in the District of Nevada, FY2016–2025 (the federal district)
- Drug Use: Courts-Martial at Nellis AFB vs. Federal Court in the District of Nevada (same installation)
- Drug Distribution: Courts-Martial at Nellis AFB vs. Federal Court in the District of Nevada (same installation)
- Drug Possession: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina (other installations)
- Drug Possession: Courts-Martial at Camp Pendleton vs. Federal Court in the Southern District of California (other installations)
- Drug Possession: Courts-Martial at San Diego vs. Federal Court in the Southern District of California (other installations)
- Drug Possession Sentences: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial, 2016–2025
- Drug Possession: Federal Sentences vs. Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025
- Drug Possession: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial
- Army Article 112a Cases by the Numbers, 2021–2025 (court-martial data)
- What Sentence Follows an Army Drug Conviction? (court-martial data)
- How Often Are Contested Army Article 112a Cases Acquitted? (court-martial data)
- Guilty Pleas in Army Drug Cases: How Often, and What Came Next (court-martial data)
- Are Air Force Drug Courts-Martial Disappearing? Article 112a, 2016–2025 (court-martial data)
- How Much Confinement for an Article 112a Conviction in the Air Force? (court-martial data)
- Pleading Guilty to Article 112a in the Air Force: What Sentences Followed? (court-martial data)
- Is Navy-Marine Corps Drug Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 112a, 2017–2025 (court-martial data)
- How Much Confinement for an Article 112a Conviction in the Navy-Marine Corps? (court-martial data)
- Fighting a Navy-Marine Corps Drug Charge: How Contested Cases Ended (court-martial data)
- When Navy-Marine Corps Accused Plead Guilty to Drug (court-martial data)
- Article 112a (Wrongful Use, Possession of Controlled Substances): Court-Martial Data and Trends (court-martial data)
- Article 112a UCMJ Drug Offenses and Positive Urinalysis (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.