18 U.S.C. 81, Arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025
In fiscal years 2016 to 2025, 93 federal defendants had cases end with 18 U.S.C. 81 as the most serious charge, and 82 of them (88%) were convicted. Of the 82 convicted, 77 (94%) received a prison term on that charge, with a median of 37 months (3.1 years). Only 5 cases went to trial, and 2 of the 5
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › 18 U.S.C. 81
In brief: In fiscal years 2016 to 2025, 93 federal defendants had cases end with 18 U.S.C. 81 as the most serious charge, and 82 of them (88%) were convicted. Of the 82 convicted, 77 (94%) received a prison term on that charge, with a median of 37 months (3.1 years). Only 5 cases went to trial, and 2 of the 5 ended in an acquittal.
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.
Prison Terms Followed Most Convictions
This post covers Title 18, section 81 of the U.S. Code, which is headed "Arson within special maritime and territorial jurisdiction". Every one of the 93 defendants (100%) faced the charge as a felony.
Of the 82 convicted, 77 received a prison term on this charge. The median term was 37 months (3.1 years). That median counts only defendants with a term of 1 month or more.
Pleas, Dismissals, and Trials
The Federal Judicial Center data includes every defendant whose case ended, not only those convicted. Of the 93, 79 (85%) pleaded guilty and 9 (10%) had their cases dismissed.
Dismissals in these records include charges dropped on the government's motion. For example, a charge can be dismissed after a defendant pleaded guilty in another case.
Only 5 defendants (5%) went to trial. Of the 4 jury trials, 1 ended in an acquittal. The single bench trial, decided by a judge, also ended in an acquittal. With 5 trials over 10 fiscal years, these counts are too small to describe a trial acquittal rate for this section.
Who Represented These Defendants?
The records list only 2 types of counsel for this section. Federal public or community defenders represented 64 defendants (69%). CJA panel attorneys represented 29 (31%). No retained private counsel or self-represented defendants appear in the table.
Defenders had a guilty plea rate of 86% and a dismissal rate of 11%, with 2 trials and 0 acquittals. CJA panel attorneys had a guilty plea rate of 83% and a dismissal rate of 7%, with 3 trials and 2 acquittals.
These are small groups of cases. They show how the cases in each group ended, not the quality of the lawyers. Defendants who receive different types of counsel 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 | 64 | 86% | 11% | 2 | 0 (0 of 2) |
| CJA panel attorney | 29 | 83% | 7% | 3 | 2 (2 of 3) |
Cases by Fiscal Year
Between 5 and 9 cases ended each year from fiscal year 2016 through fiscal year 2022. The count was higher in the last 3 years shown: 15 in 2023, 16 in 2024, and 13 in 2025.
In fiscal year 2025, all 13 cases (100%) ended in a guilty plea. The records show the yearly counts but cannot show why they changed.
| Fiscal year | Cases ended | Pleaded guilty | Dismissed | Trials | Acquitted at trial |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 9 | 6 of 9 | 2 of 9 | 1 | 1 (1 of 1) |
| 2017 | 6 | 4 of 6 | 2 of 6 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 9 | 8 of 9 | 1 of 9 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 6 | 4 of 6 | 0 of 6 | 2 | 0 (0 of 2) |
| 2020 | 5 | 5 of 5 | 0 of 5 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 7 | 7 of 7 | 0 of 7 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 7 | 4 of 7 | 3 of 7 | 0 | 0 |
| 2023 | 15 | 87% | 7% | 1 | 1 (1 of 1) |
| 2024 | 16 | 94% | 0% | 1 | 0 (0 of 1) |
| 2025 | 13 | 100% | 0% | 0 | 0 |
Limits of These Numbers
The defendants are counted by their most serious charge at the end of the case. The records do not describe the conduct in any case, the evidence, or any plea agreement.
The approved crosswalk has no close court-martial counterpart for this section. This post therefore reports federal numbers without a military comparison.
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. 81, 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. 4, Misprision of felony: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025 (same title of the U.S. Code)
- 18 U.S.C. 13, Laws of States adopted for areas within Federal jurisdiction: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025 (same title of the U.S. Code)
- 18 U.S.C. 111, Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees: How Federal Cases Ended, FY2016–2025 (same title of the U.S. Code)
- 18 U.S.C. 113, Assaults within maritime and territorial jurisdiction: 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.