Fort Riley Before and After 2024: How Its Courts-Martial Changed

Trends › By Installation › Fort Riley › Before and after 2024

Based on 35 cases · 2024–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026

Orders Violations and Absence Charges

All 35 records list charges, and each article is counted once per case. Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) was charged in 10 cases (29%), compared with 10% across the Army. Article 86 (AWOL) was charged in 7 cases (20%), compared with 3%. Article 112a (wrongful use or possession of controlled substances) was also charged more often: 14% compared with 5%.

Article 134, the general article, was charged less often than Army-wide: 17% compared with 21%. Article 128b (domestic violence) was charged in 26% of cases and Article 128 (assault) in 23%, about the same as the Army figures of 25% and 20%.

From 2020–2023 to Now

The earlier period had 50 cases over 4 years, about 12 a year. Since 2024 there have been about 15 a year, counting full years only. The contested share, meaning cases where the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge, went from 18% to 23%.

Median confinement went from 8 months to 5 months. Convictions with confinement were about the same: 89% before and 91% after. Punitive discharges for convicted enlisted members went from 81% to 79%, and general courts-martial from 78% to 74%. Full acquittals in contested cases that reached a verdict went from 3 of 8 to 1 of 8. Small counts like these change easily, so they show direction, not precise size.

Most Convictions Included Short Confinement

91% of the 34 convictions included confinement. The median was 5 months, compared with 6 months Army-wide. A quarter of those sentences were 1.3 years or longer. 18 convictions (53%) included under 6 months, compared with 39% across the Army.

8 of 34 convictions (24%) included more than one year, compared with 30% Army-wide. 2 (6%) included 5 years or more. 3 convictions (9%) included no confinement, compared with 15%. These are sentences as adjudged at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. They cover every charge in the case.

Punitive Discharges Higher Than the Army Rate

Of 33 enlisted members convicted, 26 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (79%), compared with 73% across the Army. 7 of the 26 were dishonorable. There was 1 convicted officer or warrant officer, and 1 was dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge.

A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not cover.

Convictions on Every Top Charge

All 10 cases charging Article 92 ended in a conviction on that article, with a median confinement of 4 months. All 9 Article 128b cases ended in a conviction, also with a median of 4 months. All 8 Article 128 cases did, with a median of 5 months. A case can combine a conviction on one article with an acquittal on another, so the rows overlap.

Pleas and Who Decided Guilt

27 accused pleaded guilty and 8 contested at least one charge. The contested share was 23%, about the same as 21% in the rest of the Army. All 27 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement. Army records show that an agreement existed, not its terms.

The accused usually chooses between a military judge alone and a panel of members. A judge alone heard 31 cases, an enlisted panel heard 4, and an officer panel heard 0. Members decided 11% of cases, compared with 13% across the Army. Judge-alone cases are mostly guilty pleas, so this split mostly follows the contested share.

Rank and Court Level

By rank, 23 accused were junior enlisted members, 11 were NCOs, and 1 was an officer. General courts-martial, which can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge, made up 74% of the 34 cases with a court level listed (25 of 34). The court level is not listed for 1 case. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Camp Humphreys and Fort Benning

Camp Humphreys (36 cases) and Fort Benning (37 cases) handled a similar volume in these years. Fort Riley's 79% punitive discharge share was the highest of the 3, compared with 61% and 60%. It had the fewest full acquittals: 1 of 8, compared with 4 of 11 and 4 of 7. Its median confinement of 5 months was the same as Fort Benning's.

Rule Changes and What the Records Omit

The records show 18 cases in 2024, 12 in 2025, and 5 in 2026 through September, a partial year. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses such as sexual assault, domestic violence, and murder. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. Trial dates are recorded but offense dates are not, so these cases include trials under both the old and new rules. The data cannot show whether the changes affected these results.

Nonjudicial punishment, administrative separations, cases closed with no action, the evidence, and the plea terms are all absent.

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

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.