Theft and Fraud: Sentences After a Guilty Plea vs. After Trial, Federal Court and Courts-Martial
In federal court, the median prison term was 20 months after a guilty plea and 48 months after a trial in theft and fraud cases sentenced under guideline §2B1.1. In courts-martial for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121), the median confinement was 5 months after a guilty plea and 4 months in con
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 9 min read
Trends › Federal Prosecution Analysis › Theft and Fraud by Dollar Loss › Theft and Fraud: Plea vs. Trial
In brief: In federal court, the median prison term was 20 months after a guilty plea and 48 months after a trial in theft and fraud cases sentenced under guideline §2B1.1. In courts-martial for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121), the median confinement was 5 months after a guilty plea and 4 months in contested cases that ended in conviction. Federal court and courts-martial do not show the same pattern, and the court-martial contested group is small.
This post uses the U.S. Sentencing Commission's records of 53,639 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 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.
Federal Prison Terms After a Plea and After a Trial
Federal prison terms were longer after a trial than after a plea. The median was 48 months for people convicted at trial and sent to prison, and 20 months after a guilty plea.
The trial figure rests on 2,154 people. All of them are drawn from the 53,639 people sentenced in fiscal years 2016 to 2025.
The federal data counts a person as a trial case even if the person pleaded guilty to some counts and went to trial on others.
Court-Martial Medians Are Closer Together
The court-martial data covers 462 convictions after a guilty plea and 89 convictions in contested cases, with trial dates from 2016 to 2025. A plea was recorded for 551 convictions, and 84% of them were guilty pleas.
The median confinement after a guilty plea was 5 months, based on 386 cases with confinement. In contested cases, it was 4 months, based on 57 cases with confinement.
In courts-martial, then, the contested median was lower than the plea median. The records do not show why.
Service by Service
The Army contested median was 8 months, higher than its 3-month median after a plea. That contested figure comes from 13 cases.
The Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps contested medians were lower than their plea medians. The Air Force figures were 3 months after a plea and 2.5 months in contested cases, and the contested figure uses 18 cases.
Case counts for contested sentences range from 12 to 18 in the table. A change in a few sentences could change those medians.
| Service | Median confinement after a guilty plea (cases) | Median confinement, contested cases (cases) |
|---|---|---|
| Army | 3 months (113) | 8 months (13) |
| Air Force | 3 months (31) | 2.5 months (18) |
| Navy | 6 months (106) | 5.5 months (12) |
| Marine Corps | 6.5 months (136) | 5.5 months (14) |
Who Is Counted in Each Group
A court-martial is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. That includes mixed pleas, and it does not require a full trial.
The federal group is defined by the way the case ended, not by the plea at the start.
How Often Federal Cases Followed the Guidelines
The federal data compares sentences with the guideline range. A within-range sentence was imposed in 42% of cases, and a sentence below the range at the government's request in 25%.
A sentence below the range without a government request was imposed in 30%, and one above the range in 3%.
The federal plea rate for this offense was 96%, so the trial group is a small share of all those sentenced. The federal medians compare 2,154 trial cases with a far larger plea group.
What the Records Cannot Show
Court-martial sentences are as adjudged at trial, before any clemency or appeal. Federal prison terms are the terms imposed, not time served.
Neither data set shows what sentence a person was offered or would have received under a different plea. The data therefore cannot show whether pleading guilty changed a sentence, and no sentence difference here should be read as the effect of a plea.
How We Counted
Courts-martial: convictions for larceny, theft, and fraud (Article 121; federal guideline §2B1.1) with trial dates in 2016 to 2025, split by plea (462 guilty pleas, 89 contested). Medians use cases with confinement adjudged. Federal: 53,639 people sentenced under primary guideline §2B1.1 (theft, embezzlement, fraud, and property damage), fiscal years 2016 to 2025 (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.
Plea agreements work differently. In federal court, most plea agreements do not bind the judge on the sentence. Since 2019, a military plea agreement can set a minimum and maximum sentence that the military judge must follow if the judge accepts the agreement. The federal numbers count anyone who pleaded guilty, with or without a written agreement.
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 Sentences Since the 2023 Military Sentencing Reform: What the Data Shows So Far
- 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
- 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.