A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Campbell: 2024
Fort Campbell tried 27 courts-martial in 2024. Of convicted enlisted members, 91% received a punitive discharge, compared with 72% Army-wide. Article 120b (child sexual abuse) was charged in 19% of cases, compared with 9% across the Army.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › By Installation › Fort Campbell › 2024
Short answer: Fort Campbell tried 27 courts-martial in 2024. Of convicted enlisted members, 91% received a punitive discharge, compared with 72% Army-wide. Article 120b (child sexual abuse) was charged in 19% of cases, compared with 9% across the Army. The median confinement was 8 months, up from 4 months in 2023.
Most Convicted Enlisted Members Received a Punitive Discharge
Of 22 convicted enlisted members, 20 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (91%), compared with 72% across the Army. Of those discharges, 5 were dishonorable, the more severe form, which only a general court-martial can adjudge.
The share was 91% in 2023 as well. Among 3 convicted officers or warrant officers, 2 were dismissed, the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out an administrative separation later.
Child Sexual Abuse and Larceny Charges
All 27 records list charges, with each article counted once per case. Article 120b (child sexual abuse) was charged in 5 cases (19%), compared with 9% in all Army cases that year. Article 121 (larceny) was also charged more often than Army-wide, in 15% of cases compared with 7%.
Article 134 (general article) was the most common charge, in 26% of cases compared with 21%. Article 128b (domestic violence) was charged less often than Army-wide, in 19% compared with 23%. So was Article 128 (assault), in 15% compared with 23%. Every count here is small, so a single case changes a share by several percentage points.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, all Army cases in those years |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 134 General article | 7 | 26% | 21% |
| Art. 128b Domestic violence | 5 | 19% | 23% |
| Art. 120b Rape and sexual assault of a child | 5 | 19% | 9% |
| Art. 128 Assault | 4 | 15% | 23% |
| Art. 121 Larceny | 4 | 15% | 7% |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 3 | 11% | 15% |
| Art. 80 Attempts | 3 | 11% | 7% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 3 | 11% | 12% |
Longer Terms Than the Year Before
Of the 25 convictions, 88% included confinement. The median confinement was 8 months, compared with a 6-month median in all Army cases. A quarter of sentences were 1.5 years or longer.
Sentences longer than one year were imposed in 8 of 25 convictions (32%), more often than the 28% Army-wide. Only 3 convictions carried no confinement (12%), close to the 13% in the rest of the Army. These are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in a case. Only a general court-martial can impose more than one year of confinement.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, the rest of the Army |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 3 | 12% | 13% |
| Under 6 months | 10 | 40% | 43% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 4 | 16% | 15% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 6 | 24% | 21% |
| 5 years or more | 2 | 8% | 7% |
Changes From 2023
The number of cases was about the same: 26 in 2023 and 27 in 2024. The median confinement went from 4 months to 8 months. The share of convictions with confinement increased from 71% to 88%.
The contested share fell from 19% to 15%. There were 2 full acquittals each year, out of 5 and then 4 contested cases that reached a verdict. The general court-martial share increased from 73% to 81%. These groups are small, so a few cases can change these figures.
| 2023 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | 26 | 27 |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | 19% | 15% |
| Full acquittals (decided contested) | 2 of 5 | 2 of 4 |
| Convictions with confinement | 71% | 88% |
| Median confinement | 4 months | 8 months |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 91% | 91% |
| General courts-martial | 73% | 81% |
Guilty Pleas in Most Cases
A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. At Fort Campbell, 4 cases were contested and 23 ended in guilty pleas, a contested share of 15%, compared with 27% across the Army.
Of the guilty pleas, 22 are recorded with a plea agreement and 1 has no entry. Army records say that an agreement existed, not what it said, so any sentence cap is not visible here.
A Single Panel All Year
The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. A judge alone heard 26 cases. Members heard 1 case, with an officer panel, a share of 4% compared with 15% in all Army cases. Few cases were contested, and most guilty pleas go before a judge alone.
Rank and Court Level
The accused were 19 junior enlisted soldiers, 5 NCOs, and 3 officers, a more junior group than in all Army cases that year.
General courts-martial made up 81% of the cases (22 of 27). This level can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. Special courts-martial cap confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.
Kaiserslautern and Fort Carson
Kaiserslautern (Europe) tried 25 cases with a 24% contested share. It had 1 full acquittal in 6 contested cases that reached a verdict, a median confinement of 9 months, and an 87% enlisted punitive discharge share. Fort Carson tried 30 cases with a 33% contested share. It had 3 full acquittals in 10, a median of 4 months, and a 77% punitive discharge share. Fort Campbell had the lowest contested share and the highest punitive discharge share of the installations compared.
| Installation | Cases | Contested | Full acquittals (decided contested) | Median confinement | Punitive discharge (enlisted) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fort Campbell | 27 | 15% | 2 of 4 | 8 months | 91% |
| Kaiserslautern (Europe) | 25 | 24% | 1 of 6 | 9 months | 87% |
| Fort Carson | 30 | 33% | 3 of 10 | 4 months | 77% |
New Rules and Missing Details
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel rather than commanders decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. When every guilty finding involves an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. Both depend on offense dates, which these records do not include, so 2024 trials include cases under both the old and the new rules.
The records also leave out the evidence, plea terms, and cases handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Every court-martial tried at Fort Campbell with a trial date in 2024 (27 cases).
Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in Military Trial Results, data updated October 24, 2026. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: how this data was built. Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.
Related Analysis
- Fort Campbell: Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Year (hub)
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Campbell: 2023 (previous / next)
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Campbell: 2025 (previous / next)
- Inside 87 Courts-Martial at Fort Campbell, 2024–2026 (the whole period)
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Camp Humphreys: 2024
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Camp Humphreys: 2025
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Benning: 2022
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Benning: 2023
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at Fort Campbell, 2024
- Gregory R. Bockin
- Kenneth W. Borgnino
- Frederic P. Gallun
- John R. Maloney
- Daniel L. Mazzone
- Carrie L. Ward
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 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. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.