> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Article 134 Cases at Fort Bragg, 2021–2023: 38 Courts-Martial
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-article-134-2021-2023/
- Published: 2026-10-28T06:50:58.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T08:05:35.000Z
- Description: Fort Bragg had 38 courts-martial charging Article 134 (general article) from 2021–2023. The median confinement after conviction was 7 months, compared with 1 year for all Army Article 134 cases.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Fort Bragg, Article 134, Army

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) › [Fort Bragg](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-bragg/) › Article 134, 2021–2023

**Short answer:** Fort Bragg had 38 courts-martial charging Article 134 (general article) from 2021–2023\. The median confinement after conviction was 7 months, compared with 1 year for all Army Article 134 cases. Only 2 of the 16 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal (12%), compared with 25% across the Army.

Based on 38 cases · 2021–2023 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Shorter Confinement Than the Army as a Whole

Of 36 convictions, 30 carried confinement. The median confinement was 7 months, shorter than the 1 year median for all Army Article 134 cases in 2021–2023\. A quarter of the confinement sentences were 1.5 years or longer.

These figures are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case. Most of these cases charged the general article with other offenses.

## Fewer Long Sentences

Sentences of more than one year of confinement were imposed in 10 of 36 convictions (28%), lower than the 41% in the Army as a whole. Only 3% of convictions carried 5 years or more, compared with 10% Army-wide. Another 25% carried more than 1 year but under 5 years, compared with 32%.

Sentences of 6 months to 1 year were more common here: 33% of convictions, compared with 18% Army-wide. Sentences with no confinement were 17% of convictions, compared with 13%.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army Article 134 cases in 2021–2023 |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 6           | 17%        | 13%                                            |
| Under 6 months                  | 8           | 22%        | 28%                                            |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 12          | 33%        | 18%                                            |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 9           | 25%        | 32%                                            |
| 5 years or more                 | 1           | 3%         | 10%                                            |

## How Contested Cases Ended

Of 16 contested cases that reached a verdict, 2 ended in a full acquittal (12%), lower than the 25% in the rest of the Army. Another 9 ended in a partial acquittal: the accused was found not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another.

Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals appear often in Army data. A partial acquittal still leaves a conviction, and a sentence, on the remaining charges.

## More Cases Were Contested

Contested cases made up 42% of those with a plea recorded: 16 not-guilty or mixed pleas and 22 guilty pleas. In Army-wide Article 134 cases, the contested share was 31%.

Of the 22 guilty pleas, 20 are recorded with a plea agreement and 2 have no entry. Army records say whether there was an agreement, not what it contained, so any limit on the sentence it set is not visible here.

## Members Heard More Cases

A military judge alone decided 29 cases, an enlisted panel 7, and an officer panel 2\. Members heard 24% of the cases, compared with 16% in Army Article 134 cases overall. Among the contested cases, members heard 9 of 16 (56%).

The accused usually chooses whether a judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas. Fort Bragg had both a higher members share and a higher contested share than the Army as a whole.

## Who Was Charged

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 47% of the accused, NCOs 39%, and officers 13%. Across all Army Article 134 cases in 2021–2023, junior enlisted were 54%, so junior enlisted members made up a smaller share here.

Of 31 convicted enlisted members, 25 received a punitive discharge: 16 bad-conduct and 9 dishonorable. The Army-wide share for the general article was 74%. Among 5 convicted officers or warrant officers, 3 were dismissed. Members who avoided a punitive discharge could still be separated administratively.

## Assault and Sexual Assault in the Same Cases

The general article was the only charge in 13 of the 38 cases; Army-wide, 77 of 327 Article 134 cases charged it by itself. At Fort Bragg the most common other charges were Article 128 (assault) in 12 cases, Article 120 (sexual assault) in 9, Article 115 (communicating threats) and Article 92 (orders violation) in 6 each, and Article 128b (domestic violence) in 5.

Article 134 is a catch-all that reaches conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline or service-discrediting, along with a list of specific offenses. Because a sentence covers the whole case, the confinement and discharge figures on this page reflect the assault, sexual assault, and other charges filed alongside it. The records do not divide a sentence charge by charge.

## Court Level and Caseload

General courts-martial heard 34 of the 38 cases (89%), compared with 83% in Army-wide Article 134 cases. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, while a special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

From May 2021 to September 2023, the data holds 38 cases: 12 in 2021, 11 in 2022, and 15 in 2023\. The general article appeared in 29% of the 129 courts-martial at Fort Bragg across those years.

## Not in the Records

The services were required to begin publishing trial records under Article 140a by December 2020, and Army records in this data are sparse before 2021\. The records list trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or plea terms, and they omit cases handled by nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see [Article 134 on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com). Dates and sources for the law changes: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/).

### How We Counted

Courts-martial tried at Fort Bragg in 2021–2023 that charged Article 134 (38 cases), compared with every Army case charging Article 134 in those years.

Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.

## Related Analysis

- [Fort Bragg: Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-bragg/) (hub)
- [Article 134 (General Article): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-134-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) (hub)
- [Fort Bragg Courts-Martial, 2020–2023: What 143 Cases Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-courts-martial-2020-2023/)
- [What Was Tried at Fort Bragg, 2024–2026? 85 Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-courts-martial-2024-2026/)
- [Article 134 at Fort Bragg Before and After 2024](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-article-134-before-after-2024/)
- [Fewer or More? General Article Charges at Army Courts-Martial, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-134-trend-2021-2025/)
- [13 General Article Courts-Martial at Vilseck (Europe), 2024–2026: What the Records Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/vilseck-europe-article-134-2024-2026/)
- [22 General Article Courts-Martial at Fort Hood, 2021–2023: What the Records Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-hood-article-134-2021-2023/)
- [38 General Article Courts-Martial at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, 2021–2023: What the Records Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/joint-base-lewis-mcchord-article-134-2021-2023/)
- [S1 H6: Shady Sh\*t Going Down at Fort Liberty](https://www.bodiesburied.com/s1h6-shady-sh-t-going-down-at-fort-liberty/) (podcast, members)
- [Article 134 explained on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com)

## Military Judges Who Presided Over Article 134 Cases at Fort Bragg, 2021–2023

- [Alyssa S. Adams](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-alyssa-s-adams/)
- [Trevor I. Barna](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-trevor-i-barna/)
- [Gregory B. Batdorff](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-gregory-b-batdorff/)
- [John H. Cook](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-john-h-cook/)
- [Albert G. Courie III](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-albert-g-courie-iii/)
- [Amy S. Fitzgibbons](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-amy-s-fitzgibbons/)
- [Tyler J. Heimann](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-tyler-j-heimann/)
- [Charles L. Pritchard Jr.](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-charles-l-pritchard-jr/)
- [Robert W. Rideout Jr.](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-robert-w-rideout-jr/)
- [Travis Rogers](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-travis-rogers/)
- [Sasha N. Rutizer](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-sasha-n-rutizer/)

Names and links only. Each judge's record of pleas, findings, and sentences is on their Know Your Judge page, part of the [Court-Martial Characters](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judges/) membership.

**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](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.