> ## 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.

# Fort Drum in 2022: 17 Courts-Martial, Year in Review
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-drum-courts-martial-2022/
- Published: 2026-10-30T08:12:42.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T08:12:42.000Z
- Description: Fort Drum tried 17 courts-martial in 2022. Of those, 71% were contested, compared with 36% across the Army, and 6 of the 12 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal. Article 134 (general article) was charged in 50% of cases, compared with 21% Army-wide.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Fort Drum, Army

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) › [Fort Drum](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-drum/) › 2022

**Short answer:** Fort Drum tried 17 courts-martial in 2022\. Of those, 71% were contested, compared with 36% across the Army, and 6 of the 12 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal. Article 134 (general article) was charged in 50% of cases, compared with 21% Army-wide.

Based on 17 cases · 2022 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Most Cases Were Contested

A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge, either a not-guilty plea or a mixed plea. At Fort Drum, 12 of the 17 accused contested at least one charge and 5 pleaded guilty. The contested share was 71%, compared with 36% in the Army as a whole.

## Full and Partial Acquittals

Of the 12 contested cases that reached a verdict, 6 ended in a full acquittal (50%). That is higher than the 38% across all Army cases in 2022\. Another 4 cases (33%) ended in a partial acquittal, meaning the accused was found not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another.

Army results list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals appear often in Army records. With 12 cases, a single verdict changes these percentages by several points.

## Which Articles Were Charged

The charge lists cover 16 of the 17 cases. One case can count under several articles. Article 134 (general article) was the most common charge, in 8 cases (50%), compared with 21% across the Army. Article 120 (sexual assault) was charged in 38% of cases, compared with 26%.

Article 120b (rape and sexual assault of a child) appeared in 19% of cases, compared with 8% Army-wide. Article 128 (assault) appeared in 19%, lower than the 27% across the Army.

Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation) was charged in 4 cases (25%), compared with 18% Army-wide. Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 3 cases (19%), compared with 13%. Article 112a (wrongful use, possession of controlled substances) was charged in 2 cases (12%), about the same as the 13% across the Army.

| UCMJ Article                                                                                                                                       | Cases | Share here | Share, the whole Army docket |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ---------- | ---------------------------- |
| [Art. 134](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com) General article                           | 8     | 50%        | 21%                          |
| [Art. 120](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-120-sexual-assault/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Rape and sexual assault                            | 6     | 38%        | 26%                          |
| [Art. 92](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-92/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Failure to obey order or regulation         | 4     | 25%        | 18%                          |
| [Art. 120b](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-120b/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Rape and sexual assault of a child      | 3     | 19%        | 8%                           |
| [Art. 128b](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-128b-domestic-violence/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Domestic violence                             | 3     | 19%        | 13%                          |
| [Art. 128](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-128/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Assault                                   | 3     | 19%        | 27%                          |
| [Art. 112a](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-112a-drug-offenses/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 2     | 12%        | 13%                          |
| [Art. 121](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-121/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Larceny                                   | 1     | 6%         | 8%                           |

## Confinement and Discharges

Of 11 convictions, 8 carried confinement. The median confinement was 6 months, the same as the Army-wide median of 6 months. A quarter of the sentences that included confinement were 2.1 years or longer. These are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case.

A punitive discharge for an enlisted member is a bad-conduct or a dishonorable discharge. Of 10 convicted enlisted members, 6 received one (60%): 5 bad-conduct and 1 dishonorable. Across the Army the share was 76%. The 1 convicted officer or warrant officer was not dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

## Changes From 2021

Fort Drum had 34 cases in 2021 and 17 in 2022\. The contested share went from 38% to 71%. Full acquittals in contested cases that reached a verdict went from 5 of 13 to 6 of 12\. The median confinement went from 3 months to 6 months, and the enlisted punitive discharge share went from 54% to 60%.

General courts-martial made up 59% of cases in 2021 and 94% in 2022\. With groups this small, a few cases either way can move each figure.

|                                     | 2021     | 2022     |
| ----------------------------------- | -------- | -------- |
| Cases                               | 34       | 17       |
| Contested (of pleas recorded)       | 38%      | 71%      |
| Full acquittals (decided contested) | 5 of 13  | 6 of 12  |
| Convictions with confinement        | 69%      | 73%      |
| Median confinement                  | 3 months | 6 months |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted)       | 54%      | 60%      |
| General courts-martial              | 59%      | 94%      |

## Court Level, Rank, and Forum

Of the 17 cases, 16 were general courts-martial (94%), compared with 75% in the rest of the Army. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge or dismissal. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 47% of the accused, NCOs 41%, and officers 12%. Across the Army, junior enlisted members were 57% of the accused.

The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Members heard 29% of the cases, all 5 on enlisted panels, and a judge alone heard the other 12\. Among contested cases, members heard 5 of 12 (42%).

## Fort Stewart and Fort Carson

Fort Stewart tried 22 Army cases in 2022 and Fort Carson tried 23\. Fort Drum had the highest contested share of the 3 installations, 71%, compared with 59% and 26%. It also had the shortest median confinement, 6 months, compared with 11 months and 1 year. Its enlisted punitive discharge share, 60%, was lower than the 80% and 90% at the other 2 installations.

| Installation | Cases | Contested | Full acquittals (decided contested) | Median confinement | Punitive discharge (enlisted) |
| ------------ | ----- | --------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------------ | ----------------------------- |
| Fort Drum    | 17    | 71%       | 6 of 12                             | 6 months           | 60%                           |
| Fort Stewart | 22    | 59%       | 6 of 13                             | 11 months          | 80%                           |
| Fort Carson  | 23    | 26%       | 2 of 6                              | 1 year             | 90%                           |

## What These Records Leave Out

These records cover only cases that reached a courtroom. Cases resolved by nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action are not included. The records also do not describe the evidence or the plea terms.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/).

### How We Counted

Every court-martial tried at Fort Drum with a trial date in 2022 (17 cases).

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 Drum: Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-drum/) (hub)
- [By Year](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-year/) (hub)
- [What Fort Drum Tried in 2021](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-drum-courts-martial-2021/) (previous / next)
- [A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Drum: 2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-drum-courts-martial-2023/) (previous / next)
- [Fort Drum, 2020–2023: Charges, Verdicts, and Sentences in 72 Cases](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-drum-courts-martial-2020-2023/) (the whole period)
- [A Year of Courts-Martial at Camp Humphreys: 2024](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/camp-humphreys-courts-martial-2024/)
- [A Year of Courts-Martial at Camp Humphreys: 2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/camp-humphreys-courts-martial-2025/)
- [A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Benning: 2022](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-benning-courts-martial-2022/)
- [A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Benning: 2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-benning-courts-martial-2023/)
- [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members)

← Previous: [What Fort Drum Tried in 2021](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-drum-courts-martial-2021/)Next: [A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Drum: 2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-drum-courts-martial-2023/) →

## Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at Fort Drum, 2022

- [James Barkei](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-james-barkei/)
- [Gregory R. Bockin](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-gregory-r-bockin/)
- [Michael C. Farkas](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-michael-c-farkas/)
- [Troy A. Smith](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-troy-a-smith/)

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.