> ## 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. # Obstruction of Justice: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/ - Published: 2026-11-03T06:11:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-11-03T06:11:00.000Z - Description: Courts-martial at Camp Lejeune produced 28 obstruction of justice convictions under Article 131b with trial dates from 2017 to 2025, and the median adjudged confinement was 10 months. In the Eastern District of North Carolina, the U.S. Sentencing Commission counted 10 people sentenced under guidelin - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Federal [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [Federal Prosecution Analysis](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal/) › [Obstruction of Justice and Perjury](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-perjury-vs-courts-martial/) › Obstruction of Justice: Camp Lejeune **In brief:** Courts-martial at Camp Lejeune produced 28 obstruction of justice convictions under Article 131b with trial dates from 2017 to 2025, and the median adjudged confinement was 10 months. In the Eastern District of North Carolina, the U.S. Sentencing Commission counted 10 people sentenced under guideline §2J1.2, and the median prison term for those sent to prison was 10.5 months. These medians are about the same, but the federal count covers the whole district and is very small. Updated November 3, 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 10 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/). ## Different Groups of Cases Camp Lejeune is inside the federal Eastern District of North Carolina. The 10 federal sentences come from anywhere in that district. They are not cases from the base, and most of the people sentenced were not service members. On the military side, the records list the trial location as "Camp Lejeune", "Camp Lejeune, North Carolina", or "Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune". All 28 convictions were Marine Corps cases. Neither data set shows which court would have heard any case if the other system had handled it. Court-martial years follow the trial date. Federal years are fiscal years, which run from October 1 to September 30\. The federal sentences in this district fall in fiscal years 2016 to 2021. ## Confinement and Discharges for Marines Convicted at Camp Lejeune Confinement was part of 25 of the 28 sentences recorded (89%). The median was 10 months. A quarter of those convicted received 22 months or more. These are sentences as adjudged at trial, before any clemency or appeal. Of the 28 enlisted members convicted, 25 (89%) received a punitive discharge. There were 6 dishonorable discharges and 19 bad-conduct discharges. A general court-martial, the higher trial level, heard 15 of the 28 cases (54%). The 10-month median at Camp Lejeune matched the median for all courts-martial for this offense in the data, which recorded 329 convictions. ## Federal Obstruction Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina Of the 10 people sentenced, 6 (60%) received a prison term. Another 3 (30%) received probation only, with no prison or other confinement. Federal prison terms are the terms imposed, not the time actually served. Among those sent to prison, the median was 10.5 months. A quarter received 16.5 months or more, and a quarter received 6.8 months or less. Across all federal districts, 1,256 people were sentenced under §2J1.2, and their median prison term was 18 months. The district median was lower than that national figure. Supervised release after prison was ordered for 6 people (60%), with a median term of 30 months. A fine was ordered for 2 (20%), and restitution for 2 (20%). A mandatory minimum prison term applied to 0 of 9 people with that information. | | Courts-martial at Camp Lejeune | Federal court, Eastern District of North Carolina | | ---------------------------------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------- | | Convictions or people sentenced | 28 | 10 | | Sentenced to confinement or prison | 89% | 60% | | Median confinement or prison | 10 months | 10.5 months | | A quarter received this or more | 22 months | 16.5 months | | Pleaded guilty | 20 of 26 with a plea recorded (77%) | 80% | | Mandatory minimum applied | See the caveats | 0 of 9 with the information (0 of 9) | ## Were Most Federal Sentences Below the Guideline Range? The federal sentencing guidelines produce a recommended range for each case. In this district, none of the 10 sentences were within the range and none were above it. Below the range without a government request accounted for 8 sentences (80%). Below the range at the government's request accounted for 2 (20%). With only 10 cases, these percentages can shift with each added sentence. Criminal history also counts in the federal range. In this district, 60% were in the lowest criminal history category, category I, and 10% were in the highest, category VI. Court-martial records have no criminal history field, so this comparison is possible only on the federal side. ## Pleas on Each Side A plea was recorded for 26 of the 28 Camp Lejeune convictions, and 20 (77%) were guilty pleas. In the district, 8 of 10 people (80%) pleaded guilty and 2 were convicted after a trial. All 8 guilty pleas had a written plea agreement. At Camp Lejeune, the median confinement after a guilty plea was 7.5 months, based on 18 cases with confinement. In contested cases that ended in conviction, it was 10 months, based on 5 cases. In federal court, the median prison term after a guilty plea was 12 months. After a trial it was 10.5 months, based on 2 people convicted at trial and sent to prison. ## Earlier and Later Trials at Camp Lejeune For trials in 2016 to 2019, the median confinement was 15 months across 12 cases with confinement. For trials in 2020 to 2025, it was 7 months across 13 cases. The later median was lower. The records do not show why. ## What These Records Leave Out The federal count is small, so a single sentence can move its median and percentages. The records do not describe the facts of any case, how serious the conduct was, or whether a case was ever considered for the other system. They count sentences, not the reasons behind them. ### How We Counted Courts-martial with trial dates in 2016 to 2025 whose recorded trial location is Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, ending in a conviction for obstruction of justice (Article 131b) (28). Federal: people sentenced in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 in the Eastern District of North Carolina (U.S. Sentencing Commission district label "N Carolina East") under guideline §2J1.2 (obstruction of justice) (10). 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. ## 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) - [Obstruction of Justice and Perjury: Federal vs. Court-Martial Sentences](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-perjury-vs-courts-martial/) (overview) - [Federal Sentences in the Eastern District of North Carolina, FY2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-district-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (the federal district) - [Child Pornography: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-pornography-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (same installation) - [Child Sexual Abuse and Enticement: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-sex-offenses-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (same installation) - [Drug Possession: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-drug-possession-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (same installation) - [Drug Use: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-drug-use-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (same installation) - [Drug Distribution: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-drug-distribution-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (same installation) - [Theft and Fraud: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-theft-fraud-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (same installation) - [Aggravated Assault: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-aggravated-assault-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (same installation) - [Obstruction of Justice: Courts-Martial at Camp Pendleton vs. Federal Court in the Southern District of California](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-camp-pendleton-vs-southern-district-of-california/) (other installations) - [Obstruction of Justice: Courts-Martial at Fort Bliss vs. Federal Court in the Western District of Texas](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-fort-bliss-vs-western-district-of-texas/) (other installations) - [Obstruction of Justice: Courts-Martial at Norfolk vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of Virginia](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-norfolk-vs-eastern-district-of-virginia/) (other installations) - [Obstruction of Justice: Federal Sentences vs. Air Force Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-vs-air-force/) - [Obstruction of Justice: Federal Sentences vs. Army Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-vs-army/) - [Obstruction of Justice: Federal Sentences vs. Marine Corps Courts-Martial, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-vs-marine-corps/) - [How Has Article 131b Changed in Army Courts-Martial Since 2021?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-trend-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [How Much Confinement for an Article 131b Conviction in the Army?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-sent-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [How Often Are Contested Army Article 131b Cases Acquitted?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-acq-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the Army: What Sentences Followed?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-131b-plea-2021-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Air Force Article 131b Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-131b-trend-2016-2025/) (court-martial data) - [What Sentence Follows an Air Force Obstruction Conviction?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-131b-sent-2016-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the Air Force: What Sentences Followed?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-article-131b-plea-2016-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Is Navy-Marine Corps Obstruction Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 131b, 2017–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-131b-trend-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [How Much Confinement for an Article 131b Conviction in the Navy-Marine Corps?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-131b-sent-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Not Guilty Pleas in Navy-Marine Corps Article 131b Cases: What Happened at Trial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-131b-acq-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Pleading Guilty to Article 131b in the Navy-Marine Corps: What Sentences Followed?](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/navy-marine-corps-article-131b-plea-2017-2025/) (court-martial data) - [Article 131b (Obstruction, Numbered Since 2019): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-131b-courts-martial/) (court-martial data) - [Article 131b UCMJ: Obstructing Justice](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-131b/?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.