Theft and Fraud Sentences Since the 2023 Military Sentencing Reform: What the Data Shows So Far
It may be too early to tell what the 2023 military sentencing reform changed for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121). In the court-martial data, the median adjudged confinement was 3.4 months for 124 convictions at trials in 2022 and 2023, and 3 months for 136 convictions at trials in 2024 and 2
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 9 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Theft and Fraud by Dollar Loss › Theft and Fraud: 2023 Reform
In brief: It may be too early to tell what the 2023 military sentencing reform changed for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121). In the court-martial data, the median adjudged confinement was 3.4 months for 124 convictions at trials in 2022 and 2023, and 3 months for 136 convictions at trials in 2024 and 2025. Federal median prison terms for guideline §2B1.1 cases were 21 months and 20 months in the matching fiscal years.
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 53,639 people sentenced in federal court in fiscal years 2022 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 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 Changed in the Court-Martial Numbers
Confinement was adjudged in 106 of the 124 convictions at trials in 2022 and 2023 (85%). For trials in 2024 and 2025, it was adjudged in 101 of 136 (74%).
A quarter of the sentences were 8 months or more in the earlier period and 6 months or more in the later one. One conviction in the later period carried confinement for life.
Guilty pleas accounted for 83% of convictions in 2022 and 2023 and 85% in 2024 and 2025.
| Courts-martial 2022–2023 | Courts-martial 2024–2025 | Federal FY2022–2023 | Federal FY2024–2025 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Convictions or people sentenced | 124 | 136 | 10,112 | 9,819 |
| With confinement or prison | 85% | 74% | 76% | 75% |
| Median confinement or prison | 3.4 months | 3 months | 21 months | 20 months |
| Guilty pleas | 83% | 85% | 96% | 96% |
Why the Reform Is Hard to Measure Yet
The reform has a start date. For cases in which every guilty finding is for an offense committed after December 27, 2023, a military judge sentences alone under sentencing parameters.
Courts-martial tried in 2024 and 2025 mix old-rule and new-rule cases, and the records cannot tell them apart.
The change in the medians happened in the same period as the reform, but the records cannot show whether one caused the other.
Discharges and Officers
Of 115 enlisted members convicted in 2022 and 2023, 68 received a punitive discharge (59%). There were 11 dishonorable discharges and 57 bad-conduct discharges.
Of 124 enlisted members convicted in 2024 and 2025, 70 received a punitive discharge (56%). That group had 3 dishonorable discharges and 67 bad-conduct discharges.
Officers convicted numbered 8 in the earlier period and 10 in the later one, with 4 and 3 dismissed. A general court-martial decided 47 of the 124 earlier convictions (38%).
The Service Mix
In 2022 and 2023, the convictions came from the Army (59), the Air Force (13), the Navy (24), and the Marine Corps (28). In 2024 and 2025, they came from the Army (57), the Air Force (23), the Navy (29), and the Marine Corps (27).
The services have different confinement rates and medians for this offense, so a change in the mix can move the combined figures.
Federal Court in the Same Years
The U.S. Sentencing Commission counted 10,112 people sentenced under guideline §2B1.1 in fiscal years 2022 and 2023. Of them, 7,647 (76%) received prison and 1,960 (19%) received probation only.
For fiscal years 2024 and 2025, the count was 9,819 people, with 7,337 (75%) in prison and 2,041 (21%) on probation only.
The median prison term was 21 months in the earlier years and 20 months in the later years. A quarter received 7 months or less in the first period and 6 months or less in the second, and 40 months or more in both.
Federal guilty pleas were 96% in both periods: 9,697 people, then 9,443. Trial convictions were 415, then 376.
What the Records Cannot Show
Court-martial sentences are as adjudged at trial, before any clemency or appeal. Federal terms are those imposed, not time served.
The data covers only a short period after the reform date, and the new rules apply only to later offenses. The post reports what the data shows so far, and the records cannot separate the reform from other changes in cases or in the services.
How We Counted
Courts-martial ending in a conviction for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121; federal guideline §2B1.1): trials in 2022 and 2023 (124) and in 2024 and 2025 (136). Federal: people sentenced under primary guideline §2B1.1 (theft, embezzlement, fraud, and property damage) in fiscal years 2022 and 2023 (10,112) and 2024 and 2025 (9,819), 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.
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.
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.
Federal supervised release. Most federal prison sentences are followed by a term of supervised release that the judge sets as part of the sentence. A person who violates it can be sent back to prison. A court-martial cannot sentence anyone to supervision after release. Military parole and mandatory supervised release are decided later by a board, not by the judge at trial.
Who decides the sentence, and under what rules. Federal judges sentence every federal case. They must calculate the Sentencing Guidelines range, which is advisory, and must impose any mandatory minimum the statute requires unless an exception applies. In courts-martial, the accused could choose sentencing by members until the rules changed. For cases in which every guilty finding is for an offense committed after December 27, 2023, a military judge sentences alone, within sentencing parameters. Courts-martial tried in 2024 and later include both old-rule and new-rule cases, and the data cannot tell them apart.
How life sentences and "time served" are counted. In the federal numbers, a life sentence is counted as 470 months, and any other sentence longer than 470 months is counted as just under 470 months. A sentence of "time served" is counted as one day (0.03 months). Averages are affected by these rules; medians much less.
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)
- Theft and Fraud by Dollar Loss: Federal Sentences vs. Article 121 Courts-Martial (overview)
- Theft and Fraud Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Army Courts-Martial
- Theft and Fraud Charges: How Often Federal Trials and Courts-Martial End in Acquittal
- Theft and Fraud Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Marine Corps Courts-Martial
- Theft and Fraud Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Navy Courts-Martial
- Guilty Pleas in Theft and Fraud Cases: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial
- Theft and Fraud Convictions of Junior Enlisted (E-1 to E-4): Courts-Martial Compared With Federal Court
- Are Courts-Martial More Likely to End in Acquittal Than Federal Trials? (related comparison)
- Guilty Pleas in Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial, Year by Year (related comparison)
- Child Pornography Sentences: Federal Court vs. Courts-Martial, 2016–2025 (related comparison)
- Federal Law Has No Crime of Drug Use: How Article 112a Cases Compare (related comparison)
- Drug Distribution and Importation: Federal vs. Court-Martial Sentences, 2016–2025 (related comparison)
- Sexual Abuse of an Adult: Federal Cases vs. Article 120 Courts-Martial (related comparison)
- Child Sexual Abuse and Enticement: Federal Cases vs. Article 120b Courts-Martial (related comparison)
- Army Article 121 Cases by the Numbers, 2021–2025 (court-martial data)
- Article 121 Sentences in the Army: Confinement and Discharges, 2021–2025 (court-martial data)
- Fighting an Army Larceny Charge: How Contested Cases Ended (court-martial data)
- Guilty Pleas in Army Larceny Cases: How Often, and What Came Next (court-martial data)
- Air Force Article 121 Cases by the Numbers, 2016–2025 (court-martial data)
- What Sentence Follows an Air Force Larceny Conviction? (court-martial data)
- Pleading Guilty to Article 121 in the Air Force: What Sentences Followed? (court-martial data)
- How Has Article 121 Changed in Navy-Marine Corps Courts-Martial Since 2017? (court-martial data)
- Article 121 Sentences in the Navy-Marine Corps: Confinement and Discharges, 2017–2025 (court-martial data)
- Not Guilty Pleas in Navy-Marine Corps Article 121 Cases: What Happened at Trial (court-martial data)
- Guilty Pleas in Navy-Marine Corps Larceny Cases: How Often, and What Came Next (court-martial data)
- Article 121 (Larceny): Court-Martial Data and Trends (court-martial data)
- Article 121 UCMJ: Larceny and Wrongful Appropriation (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.