Drug Use Sentences in 2023: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial
The 2023 median for an Article 112a drug use conviction at court-martial was 2.8 months of confinement, across 70 convictions. The federal median prison term for simple possession in fiscal year 2023 was 1.1 months, across the 89 of 159 people sent to prison. Confinement was also more common at cour
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 8 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Federal Law Has No Crime of Drug Use › Drug Use: 2023
In brief: The 2023 median for an Article 112a drug use conviction at court-martial was 2.8 months of confinement, across 70 convictions. The federal median prison term for simple possession in fiscal year 2023 was 1.1 months, across the 89 of 159 people sent to prison. Confinement was also more common at courts-martial: 90% compared with 56%.
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 159 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal year 2023, 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.
Small Counts on Both Sides
Both groups are small in 2023. Courts-martial recorded 70 convictions for wrongful drug use, and federal court sentenced 159 people under 21 U.S.C. 844, simple possession, the nearest federal charge.
With counts this size, a few cases can move a median or a percentage. The 2023 numbers describe one year and are not a trend on their own.
| Courts-martial, 2023 | Federal court, FY2023 | |
|---|---|---|
| Convictions or people sentenced | 70 | 159 |
| Sentenced to confinement or prison | 90% | 56% |
| Median confinement or prison | 2.8 months | 1.1 months |
| A quarter received this or more | 5.9 months | 12 months |
| Pleaded guilty | 61 of 70 with a plea recorded (87%) | 95% |
| Mandatory minimum applied | See the caveats | 23 of 123 with the information (19%) |
Court-Martial Sentences
The Air Force had 38 of the 70 convictions, the Army 13, the Navy 10, and the Marine Corps 9.
63 of the 70 convictions with a sentence recorded included confinement. The median adjudged confinement was 2.8 months, and a quarter of those convicted received 5.9 months or more.
17 convictions (24%) were at a general court-martial. Among the 65 enlisted members convicted, 31 received a punitive discharge (48%): 26 bad-conduct discharges and 5 dishonorable discharges. 4 officers were convicted, and none of them were dismissed.
Guilty Pleas and Contested Cases at Court-Martial
All 70 convictions have a plea recorded. 61 of them (87%) were guilty pleas.
After a guilty plea, the median confinement was 2.7 months, based on 58 cases with confinement. In contested cases ending in conviction, the median was 12 months. That contested figure comes from only 5 cases with confinement.
Federal Prison and Probation in Fiscal Year 2023
Of the 159 federal defendants, 89 received a prison term and 70 (44%) received probation only, with no prison or other confinement.
Among those sent to prison, the median was 1.1 months. A quarter received 12 months or more, and a quarter received 0 months or less.
151 of the 159 (95%) pleaded guilty, and 8 were convicted after a trial. The median prison term was 0.9 months after a guilty plea. After a trial it was 88 months, based on 6 people convicted at trial and sent to prison. Of the guilty pleas, 64% had a written plea agreement and 24% were straight pleas with no agreement.
Guideline Range and Added Federal Terms
For the 144 people with guideline information, 85% (122) were sentenced within the range and 8% (12) above it. 3% (5) were below the range at the government's request, and 3% (5) were below it without one.
A mandatory minimum prison term applied to 23 people (19%). Supervised release after prison was ordered for 62 (39%), with a median of 12 months. A fine was ordered for 61 (38%), and restitution for 3 (2%).
Criminal history category I, the lowest, included 48% of the federal defendants, and category VI, the highest, included 10%. Court-martial records have no criminal history field.
Calendar Year, Fiscal Year, and the Longer Period
The court-martial count uses trial dates in calendar year 2023. Federal fiscal year 2023 ran from October 1, 2022 to September 30, 2023. One side counts convictions, and the other counts people sentenced.
For all years, the data has 1,071 court-martial convictions with trial dates from 2016 to 2025, with a median confinement of 3 months. Federal court sentenced 6,268 people in fiscal years 2016 to 2025, with a median prison term of 6 months. The federal yearly table follows.
Court-martial confinement is adjudged confinement, before clemency or appeal. Federal terms are imposed terms, not time served. Neither record shows the reasons for a sentence or the details of the drug use involved.
| Fiscal year | People sentenced | Median prison | Pleaded guilty |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 1,917 | 6 months | more than 99% |
| 2017 | 1,343 | 6 months | more than 99% |
| 2018 | 820 | 6 months | 99% |
| 2019 | 614 | 5.9 months | 98% |
| 2020 | 484 | 5.9 months | 97% |
| 2021 | 342 | 0.5 months | 97% |
| 2022 | 339 | 1 months | 96% |
| 2023 | 159 | 1.1 months | 95% |
| 2024 | 128 | 0.4 months | 95% |
| 2025 | 122 | 0.4 months | 96% |
How We Counted
Courts-martial with a trial date in 2023 ending in a conviction for wrongful drug use (Article 112a), compared with federal simple possession, the nearest federal charge (70). Federal: people sentenced in fiscal year 2023 under a conviction under 21 U.S.C. 844 (simple possession), the nearest federal charge (159), 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.
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)
- Drug Use Sentences in 2022: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial (previous or next year)
- Drug Use Sentences in 2024: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial (previous or next year)
- Drug Use Sentences Since the 2023 Military Sentencing Reform: What the Data Shows So Far
- Drug Use: Federal Sentences vs. Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025
- Drug Use: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial
- Drug Use: Federal Sentences vs. Marine Corps Courts-Martial
- Drug Use: Federal Sentences vs. Navy Courts-Martial, 2016–2025
- Drug Use: Courts-Martial at Barksdale AFB vs. Federal Court in the Western District of Louisiana
- Drug Use: Courts-Martial at Beale AFB vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of California
- Drug Use: Courts-Martial at Bremerton vs. Federal Court in the Western District of Washington
- 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.