Article 128 at Fort Hood Before and After 2024

Trends › By Installation › Fort Hood › Article 128

Based on 23 cases · 2024–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Fewer Contested Cases

The largest change at Fort Hood is in how assault cases ended. In 2020–2023, 62% of these cases were contested. From 2024 through August 2026, that share was 17%: 4 not-guilty or mixed pleas and 19 guilty pleas.

A case counts as contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. In the later period, Fort Hood assault cases were contested less often than all Army Article 128 cases in 2024–2026, where the contested share was 29%.

All 19 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement. Army records note that an agreement existed but not its terms, so the records cannot show what each agreement provided.

Shorter Median Confinement, Similar Share With Confinement

The share of convictions with confinement was about the same. In 2020–2023, 74% of convictions carried confinement. In 2024–2026, it was 73%, or 16 of 22 convictions.

The median confinement changed more. It went from 10 months in the earlier period to 5 months in the later one, close to the 6 months for Army Article 128 cases overall. A quarter of the confinement sentences in 2024–2026 were still 3 years or longer.

These figures are adjudged sentences, set at trial and before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. They also cover every charge in a case, not only the assault count.

How Long Were the Terms?

The sentences differ from the Army's at both the low and the high end. Of 22 convictions, 6 carried no confinement (27%), compared with 15% for all Army Article 128 cases in 2024–2026. None carried 5 years or more, compared with 6% Army-wide.

Sentences longer than one year were less common than Army-wide: 6 of 22 convictions here (27%), compared with 30%. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement, because a special court-martial is capped at one year.

Mostly General Courts-Martial

General courts-martial made up 91% of these cases (21 of 23). A general court-martial can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. In 2020–2023, the general court-martial share was 76%. Special courts-martial, which cannot adjudge a dishonorable discharge, made up the rest of the later cases.

The number of cases also fell. The earlier period had 34 cases, about 11 a year, compared with about 8 a year since, counting full years only. By year, the later counts were 8 in 2024, 8 in 2025, and 7 in 2026, a partial year. These 23 cases were 17% of all 138 courts-martial at Fort Hood in 2024–2026.

These groups are small, so a few cases can change these figures.

Discharges After Conviction

Among 21 enlisted members convicted, 17 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (81%), more often than the 72% in all Army Article 128 cases in 2024–2026. In 2020–2023 the Fort Hood share was 83%, so this share was about the same in both periods.

Of the 17 punitive discharges, 3 were dishonorable. The 1 convicted officer or warrant officer was not dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out an administrative separation later.

Assault Usually Charged With Other Offenses

Article 128 was the only charge in 9 of 23 cases. The other cases also charged other articles. Each of these was charged in 3 cases: Article 128b (domestic violence), Article 90 (disobeying an officer), Article 120 (sexual assault), and Article 134 (general article).

When assault is charged with a sexual assault or domestic violence charge, the assault count often describes part of the same incident. The sentence in such a case reflects everything the accused was convicted of.

Who Decided, and Who Was Accused

All 23 cases were tried by a military judge alone, with 0 enlisted panels and 0 officer panels. The accused usually chooses between a judge and a panel of members, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas, so this split follows the low contested share.

By rank, 13 accused were junior enlisted (E-1 to E-4), 9 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 1 was an officer or warrant officer. That group is similar to Army Article 128 cases overall, where 55% were junior enlisted.

Rule Changes That Overlap These Years

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel rather than commanders decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. For cases where every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters.

Assault under Article 128 is not itself a covered offense. Special trial counsel who take a covered offense can also take related charges, such as an assault tied to a domestic violence allegation. Both rules depend on the offense date, and the records give only trial dates. The changes above happened in the same period as these changes, and the records cannot show whether one caused the other.

Gaps in the Record

The data shows charges, pleas, findings, and sentences. It does not show when the offenses happened, what evidence was presented, or what any plea agreement said. Assaults handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation are not in these records.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 128 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.

Compare: federal court. Aggravated Assault: Federal Sentences vs. Article 128 Courts-Martial, 2016–2025

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.