> ## 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 Norfolk vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of Virginia
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-norfolk-vs-eastern-district-of-virginia/
- Published: 2026-11-03T06:11:01.000Z
- Updated: 2026-11-03T06:11:01.000Z
- Description: In both Norfolk courts-martial and the federal Eastern District of Virginia, 85% of those convicted of obstruction of justice were sentenced to confinement or prison. The medians were also about the same: 12.5 months for 26 convictions at Norfolk and 12 months for 33 people sentenced in the district
- 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: Norfolk

**In brief:** In both Norfolk courts-martial and the federal Eastern District of Virginia, 85% of those convicted of obstruction of justice were sentenced to confinement or prison. The medians were also about the same: 12.5 months for 26 convictions at Norfolk and 12 months for 33 people sentenced in the district. The federal cases come from the entire district rather than from Norfolk's military installations, and most did not involve service members.

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 33 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/).

## Where Norfolk and the District Differed

The clearest difference was at the upper end. A quarter of Norfolk court-martial sentences were 40.5 months of confinement or more. In the district, a quarter of prison terms were 21.8 months or more, and a quarter were 4.9 months or less.

Military sentences in this post are adjudged sentences, before clemency or appeal. Federal prison terms are the terms imposed, not the time served.

## Which Cases Each Count Includes

Norfolk is in the federal Eastern District of Virginia. The 33 federal sentences under guideline §2J1.2 cover the whole district. They are not cases from any base, and they do not show where a Norfolk court-martial would have been tried otherwise.

The records list the trial location as "Norfolk" or "Norfolk, Virginia" for the courts-martial counted. The 26 convictions under Article 131b had trial dates from 2016 to 2025: 25 Navy cases and 1 Marine Corps case.

Courts-martial are counted by trial date. Federal sentences are counted by fiscal year, October 1 through September 30, for fiscal years 2016 to 2025.

|                                    | Courts-martial at Norfolk           | Federal court, Eastern District of Virginia |
| ---------------------------------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------- |
| Convictions or people sentenced    | 26                                  | 33                                          |
| Sentenced to confinement or prison | 85%                                 | 85%                                         |
| Median confinement or prison       | 12.5 months                         | 12 months                                   |
| A quarter received this or more    | 40.5 months                         | 21.8 months                                 |
| Pleaded guilty                     | 22 of 26 with a plea recorded (85%) | 88%                                         |
| Mandatory minimum applied          | See the caveats                     | 0 of 33 with the information (0%)           |

## What Followed a Guilty Plea or a Trial?

Guilty pleas were common on both sides. At Norfolk, 22 of 26 convictions (85%) followed a guilty plea. In the district, 29 of 33 people (88%) pleaded guilty, and 4 were convicted after a trial. Of the federal guilty pleas, 90% had a written plea agreement and 10% were straight pleas.

After a guilty plea, the Norfolk median confinement was 12 months, from 20 cases with confinement. The federal median after a guilty plea was also 12 months. After a trial, the federal median was 21 months, based on 4 people. The Norfolk median for contested convictions was 83.9 months, but it reflects only 2 cases with confinement.

## Discharges, Officers, and Court Level at Norfolk

Of 23 enlisted members convicted, 20 (87%) received a punitive discharge. These were 4 dishonorable discharges and 16 bad-conduct discharges. Officers convicted numbered 2, and neither received a dismissal, the officer form of a punitive discharge.

Of the 26 convictions, 15 (58%) were at a general court-martial.

## Norfolk Medians by Period

Norfolk trials in 2016 to 2019 had a median confinement of 13 months, based on 9 cases with confinement. Trials in 2020 to 2025 had a median of 12 months, based on 13 cases. These are about the same. Both medians were higher than the 10-month median for all 329 court-martial obstruction convictions in the data.

## Federal Sentencing Details for the District

Only 1 person in the district (3%) received probation alone. Supervised release was ordered for 28 people (85%), with a median term of 36 months. A fine was ordered for 1 (3%), and restitution for 4 (12%). No mandatory minimum applied.

The guidelines give each federal case a recommended range. In this district, 11 sentences (33%) fell within it and 1 (3%) was above it. Below-range sentences numbered 6 (18%) at the government's request and 15 (45%) without such a request.

Most people sentenced, 70%, were in the lowest criminal history category, category I, and 6% were in category VI. Courts-martial record no criminal history. Nationally, 1,256 people were sentenced under §2J1.2, with a median prison term of 18 months, which was higher than the median in this district.

## Questions the Records Cannot Answer

These counts describe sentences, not the conduct behind them. The records cannot show how serious each case was, why a plea was entered, or whether any case could have been brought in the other system.

### How We Counted

Courts-martial with trial dates in 2016 to 2025 whose recorded trial location is Norfolk, Virginia, ending in a conviction for obstruction of justice (Article 131b) (26). Federal: people sentenced in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 in the Eastern District of Virginia (U.S. Sentencing Commission district label "Virginia East") under guideline §2J1.2 (obstruction of justice) (33). 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 Virginia, FY2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-district-eastern-district-of-virginia/) (the federal district)
- [Child Sexual Abuse and Enticement: Courts-Martial at Norfolk vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of Virginia](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-child-sex-offenses-norfolk-vs-eastern-district-of-virginia/) (same installation)
- [Drug Use: Courts-Martial at Norfolk vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of Virginia](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-drug-use-norfolk-vs-eastern-district-of-virginia/) (same installation)
- [Drug Distribution: Courts-Martial at Norfolk vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of Virginia](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-drug-distribution-norfolk-vs-eastern-district-of-virginia/) (same installation)
- [Theft and Fraud: Courts-Martial at Norfolk vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of Virginia](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-theft-fraud-norfolk-vs-eastern-district-of-virginia/) (same installation)
- [Obstruction of Justice: Courts-Martial at Camp Lejeune vs. Federal Court in the Eastern District of North Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-obstruction-camp-lejeune-vs-eastern-district-of-north-carolina/) (other installations)
- [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: 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.