NewKnow Your Judge: the court-martial record of 294 military judges → NewLearn Your Lawyer: the court-martial record of 335 military lawyers →
Where All The Bodies Are Buried
Understanding Trends

A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Polk: 2024

Fort Polk tried 15 courts-martial in 2024, down from 23 in 2023. Only 13% of cases were contested, compared with 27% Army-wide. Article 92 (orders violation) was charged in 40% of cases, compared with 12% across the Army.

Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read

Trends › By Installation › Fort Polk › 2024

Short answer: Fort Polk tried 15 courts-martial in 2024, down from 23 in 2023. Only 13% of cases were contested, compared with 27% Army-wide. Article 92 (orders violation) was charged in 40% of cases, compared with 12% across the Army.

Based on 15 cases · 2024 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Orders Violations and the General Article

All 15 records list charges, and one case can appear under several articles. Article 92 (orders violation) appeared in 6 cases (40%), compared with 12% across all Army cases in 2024. Article 134 (general article) appeared in 5 cases (33%), compared with 21%.

Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 4 cases (27%). Article 121 (larceny) and Article 120b (rape and sexual assault of a child) each appeared in 3 cases (20%), compared with 7% and 9% Army-wide. Article 115 (communicating threats) appeared in 2 cases (13%), compared with 4%.

UCMJ ArticleCasesShare hereShare, all Army cases in those years
Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation640%12%
Art. 134 General article533%21%
Art. 128b Domestic violence427%23%
Art. 121 Larceny320%7%
Art. 120b Rape and sexual assault of a child320%9%
Art. 115 Communicating threats213%4%
Art. 131b Obstructing justice17%6%
Art. 90 Willfully disobeying superior officer17%6%

Few Contested Cases

In 13 cases the accused pleaded guilty, and 2 were contested, meaning a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share, 13%, is lower than the 27% across the Army. Neither contested case that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal (0 of 2).

Of the 13 guilty pleas, 12 are recorded with a plea agreement and 1 has no entry. Army records say whether there was an agreement, not what it said.

Confinement and Discharges

All 15 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and all 15 sentences included confinement (100%). The median confinement was 6 months, the same as the Army-wide median. A quarter of the sentences were 2 years or longer.

Of 15 convicted enlisted members, 12 received a punitive discharge: 7 bad-conduct and 5 dishonorable. The share, 80%, compares with 72% in the Army as a whole. These are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

Changes From 2023

Fort Polk had 23 cases in 2023 and 15 in 2024. The contested share went from 35% to 13%. Full acquittals in contested cases that reached a verdict went from 6 of 8 to 0 of 2. The median confinement went from 1.4 years to 6 months, and the enlisted punitive discharge share went from 100% to 80%.

The share of convictions with confinement went from 94% to 100%, and general courts-martial went from 91% to 87% of cases. With groups this small, a few cases either way can move each figure.

20232024
Cases2315
Contested (of pleas recorded)35%13%
Full acquittals (decided contested)6 of 80 of 2
Convictions with confinement94%100%
Median confinement1.4 years6 months
Punitive discharge (enlisted)100%80%
General courts-martial91%87%

Rank, Court Level, and Forum

By rank, the accused were 12 junior enlisted members and 3 NCOs, with no officers. That group is more junior than the Army as a whole.

General courts-martial made up 87% of the cases (13 of 15), and special courts-martial made up the rest. A general court-martial can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A military judge alone decided 13 cases (87%). Members heard 2: 1 enlisted panel and 1 officer panel.

Kaiserslautern and Fort Campbell

Kaiserslautern (Europe) tried 25 cases in 2024 and Fort Campbell tried 27. Fort Polk had the lowest contested share of the 3, 13%, compared with 24% and 15%. Its median confinement, 6 months, was shorter than the 9 months and 8 months at the other installations. Its enlisted punitive discharge share, 80%, was lower than 87% and 91%.

InstallationCasesContestedFull acquittals (decided contested)Median confinementPunitive discharge (enlisted)
Fort Polk1513%0 of 26 months80%
Kaiserslautern (Europe)2524%1 of 69 months87%
Fort Campbell2715%2 of 48 months91%

Rule Changes and Record Limits

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. The records give no offense dates, so 2024 trials include cases under both sets of rules. The records cannot show whether these changes had any effect on the figures above.

Trial records show the charges, pleas, findings, and sentence. They do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled outside a court-martial.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.

How We Counted

Every court-martial tried at Fort Polk with a trial date in 2024 (15 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.

Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at Fort Polk, 2024

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.

↑ Top