Inside 29 Courts-Martial at Hurlburt Field, Florida, 2019–2023

Trends › By Installation › Hurlburt Field, Florida › 2019–2023

Based on 29 cases · 2019–2023 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026

Most Accused Pleaded Not Guilty

The plea is listed in 19 of the 29 records. Of those, 4 were guilty pleas and 15 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.

The contested share was 79%. That is higher than the 50% across the Air Force in the same years. A contested trial usually involves witnesses, cross-examination, and a verdict on each charge, rather than a plea hearing.

How Often Did a Contested Case End in Full Acquittal?

Of the 15 contested cases that reached a verdict, 7 ended in a full acquittal and 2 split the charges. The full-acquittal rate was 47%, slightly lower than the 51% Air Force-wide.

A partial acquittal means not guilty of at least one charge or specification and guilty of another. Air Force results report one verdict per case, so a partial acquittal appears in these records only when an appeals opinion describes it.

Members Heard Most of the Contested Cases

Members, the military equivalent of a jury, decided 48% of the cases where the forum is listed: 6 enlisted panels and 8 officer panels. A military judge alone decided the other 15 cases.

Among contested cases, members heard 11 of 15 (73%). In most cases the accused chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt.

Orders Violations and the General Article Were Charged More Often

Charges are listed in 20 of the 29 records, and each article counts once per case. Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) was charged in 35% of cases here, compared with 16% in the rest of the Air Force. Article 134, the general article, was charged in 30%, compared with 21%.

Drug charges were less common. Article 112a was charged in 20% of cases, lower than the 41% elsewhere in the service. Article 90 (willfully disobeying a superior officer), Article 115 (communicating threats), and Article 121 (larceny) were each charged in 10% of cases. All 3 shares were higher than in the rest of the Air Force. Article 120 was charged about as often as in the rest of the service.

Sentences Were Shorter Than Across the Service

Confinement was part of 70% of the 20 convictions. The median confinement was 2 months, compared with 4 months across the Air Force. A quarter of the sentences were 6 months or longer. These are sentences as adjudged at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case.

Only 1 of 20 convictions (5%) included more than one year of confinement, compared with 23% across the Air Force. Sentences with no confinement made up 30% of convictions here, compared with 12% service-wide. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement; a special court-martial is capped at one year.

The court level also made a difference here. The median confinement was 6 months in general courts-martial and 40 days in special courts-martial.

Did a Conviction Mean a Punitive Discharge?

Of 18 convicted enlisted members, 7 received a punitive discharge: 5 bad-conduct discharges and 2 dishonorable discharges. That share, 39%, is lower than the 56% in the rest of the Air Force.

2 officers or warrant officers were convicted, and 0 were 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 track.

A More Senior Group of Accused

Of the 29 accused, 14 were junior enlisted (E-1 to E-4), 12 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 3 were officers or warrant officers. Across the Air Force, 64% of accused were junior enlisted, so this group was more senior.

General courts-martial made up 17 of the 29 cases (59%), compared with 53% in the rest of the Air Force. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

2016–2018 Compared With 2019–2023

In 2016–2018 the base had 22 cases, about 7 a year. Since then it has had about 6 a year, counting full years only. The yearly counts since 2019 were 10, 4, 4, 7, and 4.

Several measures changed. Convictions with confinement went from 45% to 70%, and the median confinement went from 4 months to 2 months. General courts-martial went from 91% of cases to 59%. Punitive discharges for enlisted members went from 4 of 8 to 39%. A few cases can change percentages in groups this small, so these changes show direction, not precision.

Compared With Cannon and Davis-Monthan

Cannon AFB, New Mexico and Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona each tried 29 cases in the same years. The contested share was 79% here, 84% at Cannon, and 56% at Davis-Monthan. Full acquittals came in 7 of 15 decided contested cases here, 9 of 16 at Cannon, and 5 of 9 at Davis-Monthan.

The median confinement was 2 months at Hurlburt Field, 1.2 years at Cannon, and 6 months at Davis-Monthan. Hurlburt Field had the lowest enlisted punitive-discharge share of the 3.

What These Records Cannot Show

The data lists trial dates, not offense dates, and does not describe the evidence or any plea terms. Cases resolved through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation do not appear. Air Force records also rarely list charges when a case ends in full acquittal, never report plea agreements, and from 2016 to 2019 rarely list a guilty plea.

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.