18 U.S.C. 1071, Concealing person from arrest: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025
Of the 6 federal trials in which 18 U.S.C. 1071 was the most serious charge at the end of the case, 3 ended in an acquittal (3 of 6), all before juries. Most of the 93 defendants whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 did not go to trial: 74 (80%) pleaded guilty and 13 (14%) had their cases
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › 18 U.S.C. 1071
In brief: Of the 6 federal trials in which 18 U.S.C. 1071 was the most serious charge at the end of the case, 3 ended in an acquittal (3 of 6), all before juries. Most of the 93 defendants whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 did not go to trial: 74 (80%) pleaded guilty and 13 (14%) had their cases dismissed.
This post uses the Federal Judicial Center's records of 93 federal defendants whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025. The series also draws on the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 659,036 people sentenced 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.
What Happened at Trial?
Juries decided all 6 trials under this section, and 3 of them ended in an acquittal. No bench trials are recorded.
A group of 6 trials is very small. The result does not establish a rate that would hold for other cases under this statute.
By fiscal year, 4 of the trials came in fiscal year 2017, with 2 acquittals. Fiscal year 2018 had 1 trial, which ended in a conviction. Fiscal year 2023 had 1 trial, which ended in an acquittal.
| Fiscal year | Cases ended | Pleaded guilty | Dismissed | Trials | Acquitted at trial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 13 | 77% | 23% | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 16 | 69% | 6% | 4 | 2 (2 of 4) |
| 2018 | 21 | 71% | 24% | 1 | 0 (0 of 1) |
| 2019 | 9 | 8 of 9 | 1 of 9 | 0 | 0 |
| 2020 | 9 | 8 of 9 | 1 of 9 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 7 | 6 of 7 | 1 of 7 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 8 | 8 of 8 | 0 of 8 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | 8 | 6 of 8 | 1 of 8 | 1 | 1 (1 of 1) |
| 2025 | 2 | 2 of 2 | 0 of 2 | 0 | 0 |
Section 1071 by Its Heading
The U.S. Code heads Title 18, section 1071 "Concealing person from arrest". This post uses only that heading to identify the statute.
Felony and Misdemeanor Charges
This section was not always charged as a felony. The records show 77 defendants (83%) at the felony level and 16 (17%) at the Class A misdemeanor level. No petty offenses appear.
Convictions also totaled 77, or 83% of the 93 defendants. That figure counts guilty pleas and guilty verdicts at trial. It is a separate count from the felony total.
Prison Terms
Of the 77 convicted, 46 (60%) received a prison term on this charge. The median term was 12 months for those with a term of 1 month or more.
That median covers the sentence on this charge alone. It does not include time ordered on other counts in the same case.
How Cases Ended by Type of Counsel
CJA panel attorneys represented 66 of the defendants (71%). A CJA panel attorney is a private lawyer appointed by the court. Federal public or community defenders represented 13 (14%), and private (retained) counsel represented 12 (13%).
Federal defender cases all ended in a guilty plea (100%). With retained counsel, 92% pleaded guilty and 1 went to trial, ending in a conviction. CJA panel attorney cases had a 76% plea rate, a 17% dismissal rate, and 5 trials, 3 of which ended in an acquittal.
Differences by type of counsel describe groups of cases, not the quality of lawyers. Type of counsel is recorded at the end of the case, and people who hire a lawyer and people who receive an appointed one face different charges and circumstances.
| Type of counsel at the end of the case | Defendants | Pleaded guilty | Dismissed | Trials | Acquitted at trial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Federal public or community defender | 13 | 100% | 0% | 0 | 0 |
| CJA panel attorney | 66 | 76% | 17% | 5 | 3 (3 of 5) |
| Private (retained) counsel | 12 | 92% | 0% | 1 | 0 (0 of 1) |
Dismissals and the Limits of the Count
Charges were dismissed for 13 defendants. Dismissed can mean a dismissal on the government's motion, for example after the defendant pleaded guilty in another case.
The approved crosswalk lists no close court-martial counterpart for this statute, so the federal numbers stand alone. The records do not describe any case's facts or why a jury reached its verdict.
How We Counted
Every federal defendant whose case ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 and whose most serious charge at the end of the case (TTITLE1) was under 18 U.S.C. 1071, any subsection (93), Federal Judicial Center, counted as in the federal courts' Table D-4. Type of counsel is TCOUNSEL; labels from the FJC criminal codebook. Section heading from the U.S. Code as published by the Office of the Law Revision Counsel (release point 119-136).
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.
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.
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.
Type of counsel describes groups of cases, not lawyers. The Federal Judicial Center records the type of counsel at the end of the case. Defendants who hire a lawyer differ from defendants who receive an appointed lawyer in their charges, criminal history, and circumstances, and some defendants change lawyers during a case. Differences in outcomes by type of counsel therefore cannot be credited to the type of lawyer.
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)
- 18 U.S.C. 1038, False information and hoaxes: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025 (same title of the U.S. Code)
- 18 U.S.C. 1040, Fraud in connection with major disaster or emergency benefits: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025 (same title of the U.S. Code)
- 18 U.S.C. 1111, Murder: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025 (same title of the U.S. Code)
- 18 U.S.C. 1112, Manslaughter: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025 (same title of the U.S. Code)
- Appointed vs. Retained Lawyers in Federal Criminal Cases: How Cases Ended, 2016–2025
- Are Courts-Martial More Likely to End in Acquittal Than Federal Trials?
- 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.