Theft and Fraud Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Army Courts-Martial
Of 25 contested Army courts-martial for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121) that reached a verdict from 2021 to 2025, 5 ended in a full acquittal (20%). Another 14 (56%) were partial acquittals. In federal court, 38 of 164 trials of defendants charged with theft of government property ended in a
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 7 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Theft and Fraud by Dollar Loss › Theft and Fraud: Army Acquittals
In brief: Of 25 contested Army courts-martial for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121) that reached a verdict from 2021 to 2025, 5 ended in a full acquittal (20%). Another 14 (56%) were partial acquittals. In federal court, 38 of 164 trials of defendants charged with theft of government property ended in an acquittal (23%).
This post uses the Federal Judicial Center's records of 9,190 federal defendants whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025, compared with court-martial results from this site's Military Trial Results data (updated November 2, 2026). 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.
How Contested Army Cases Ended
The Army count has 25 contested cases that reached a verdict. A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge.
5 ended in a full acquittal, which means not guilty of all charges. 14 ended in a partial acquittal, which means not guilty of at least one charge and guilty of another.
Who Decided Guilt in Army Cases
A judge alone decided 13 Army cases, and 1 ended in a full acquittal (8%). Members decided 12 cases, and 4 ended in a full acquittal (33%).
Among the members cases, enlisted members decided 11 and 3 ended in a full acquittal (27%). An officer panel decided 1 case, which ended in a full acquittal.
The case counts are small, so these percentages can change a great deal with a single verdict.
Year by Year in the Army
In 2021 there were 6 contested cases and no full acquittals. In 2022, 3 of 8 ended in a full acquittal, and in 2023, 1 of 4 did.
In 2024 there was 1 contested case, with no full acquittal. In 2025, 1 of 6 ended in a full acquittal.
Most of the Army full acquittals fall in 2022, so the 20% overall figure depends heavily on that year.
| Year | Army: full acquittals of contested cases |
|---|---|
| 2021 | 0 of 6 |
| 2022 | 3 of 8 |
| 2023 | 1 of 4 |
| 2024 | 0 of 1 |
| 2025 | 1 of 6 |
What Federal Trials Show
The Federal Judicial Center counted 9,190 defendants charged under 18 U.S.C. 641, theft of government property, whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025. The count follows the federal courts' Table D-4.
Of these defendants, 6,127 (67%) pleaded guilty, 2,899 (32%) had their cases dismissed, and 164 (2%) went to trial. Of the 164 trials, 38 ended in an acquittal (23%).
Jury trials numbered 137, with 26 acquittals (19%). Bench trials, decided by a judge, numbered 27, with 12 acquittals (44%). A total of 6,253 defendants (68%) were convicted.
Reading the Army and Federal Rates Together
The Army figure is 20% and the federal figure is 23%, but they count different groups. The Army rate is of contested cases that reached a verdict, and the federal rate is of trials.
The Army figure also rests on 25 cases, while the federal figure rests on 164 trials. The federal data does not report partial acquittals, so the Army partial acquittals have no federal counterpart.
The federal data also counts all defendants whose cases ended, including dismissals, and the court-martial count starts only at the verdict.
What the Records Cannot Show
The records do not show why an Army case ended in acquittal, what evidence was presented, or how charges were chosen. They also do not show how many Army cases were dropped before trial.
Federal theft of government property under 18 U.S.C. 641 is one statute, while Army Article 121 covers larceny and wrongful appropriation.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial charging larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121; federal guideline §2B1.1) with trial dates in 2016 to 2025 that were contested and reached a verdict (25). Federal: defendants charged under 18 U.S.C. 641 (theft of government property) whose cases ended in fiscal years 2016 to 2025 (9,190), Federal Judicial Center.
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.
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.
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 Marine Corps Courts-Martial
- Theft and Fraud Charges: Federal Trial Acquittals vs. Contested Navy Courts-Martial
- Theft and Fraud Sentences Since the 2023 Military Sentencing Reform: What the Data Shows So Far
- Theft and Fraud Charges: How Often Federal Trials and Courts-Martial End in Acquittal
- 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)
- Article 121 (Larceny): Court-Martial Data and Trends (court-martial data)
- Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (court-martial data)
- Article 121 UCMJ: Larceny and Wrongful Appropriation (law firm reference page)
- Forum Selection (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.