21 Orders Violation Courts-Martial at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, 2019–2023: What the Records Show
In orders-violation cases (Article 92) at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay from 2019 to 2023, the median confinement across 20 convictions was 10 months, compared with 6 months across the service.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › By Installation › Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay › Article 92, 2019–2023
Short answer: In orders-violation cases (Article 92) at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay from 2019 to 2023, the median confinement across 20 convictions was 10 months, compared with 6 months across the service. Of 17 convicted enlisted members, 12 received a punitive discharge (71%), compared with 58% in all Navy and Marine Corps Article 92 cases.
Sentences Were Longer Than Elsewhere
The 21 Article 92 (orders violation) cases at Kaneohe Bay ended in 20 convictions, and 17 of those included confinement. The median confinement was 10 months. Across the Navy and Marine Corps as a whole, the median for Article 92 cases in the same years was 6 months.
A quarter of the sentences here were 1.6 years or longer. Every figure is an adjudged sentence, announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers all charges in the case, not the orders violation alone.
Sentence Lengths Compared With the Service
5 of 20 convictions (25%) included more than one year of confinement, compared with 16% across all Navy and Marine Corps Article 92 cases in 2019–2023. Of those 5, 2 were 5 years or more (10%), compared with only 3% of convictions elsewhere.
3 convictions (15%) included no confinement, compared with 24% across the service. Sentences under 6 months made up 35% here and 38% elsewhere. Sentences from 6 months to 1 year made up 25% here and 22% elsewhere. Only a general court-martial can impose more than one year of confinement.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Navy and Marine Corps Article 92 cases in 2019–2023 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 3 | 15% | 24% |
| Under 6 months | 7 | 35% | 38% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 5 | 25% | 22% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 3 | 15% | 13% |
| 5 years or more | 2 | 10% | 3% |
Orders Violations Were Usually Charged With Other Articles
Article 92 was the only charge in just 3 of the 21 cases. Article 128 (assault) was also charged in 8 cases, Article 107 (false official statement) in 7, and Article 120 (sexual assault), Article 134 (general article), and Article 112a (drug) in 4 each.
A sentence covers every charge in the case, so a term attached to a case with an assault or sexual assault count is not a measure of the orders violation by itself. The records do not show how much of any sentence relates to each charge.
Punitive Discharges
Of 17 convicted enlisted members, 12 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge, a share of 71%. Across the Navy and Marine Corps, the share in Article 92 cases was 58%. 4 of the 12 were dishonorable discharges.
Bad-conduct and dishonorable discharges are the punitive discharges available for enlisted members. A sentence without either does not rule out a later administrative separation, which does not appear in these records.
Court Level and Rank
Special courts-martial tried 13 of the cases and general courts-martial 8. General courts-martial were 38% of cases, a little higher than the 33% across all Navy and Marine Corps Article 92 cases. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and can impose a bad-conduct discharge but not a dishonorable discharge. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence.
Among the accused with rank recorded, 12 were junior enlisted (E-1 to E-4), 5 were NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 0 were officers or warrant officers. That mix was more junior than all Navy and Marine Corps Article 92 cases, where 59% were junior enlisted.
How Many Pleas Are Known?
Only 10 of the 21 records list a plea. Among them, 7 accused pleaded guilty and 3 contested, meaning a not-guilty or mixed plea to at least one charge. The contested share was 30%, compared with 35% in the rest of the Navy and Marine Corps.
Navy and Marine Corps records before December 2020 often leave out the plea, so the plea figures are based on only 10 records. They describe those cases, not all 21. The same gap means this post does not report whether a judge or a panel of members decided guilt.
Number and Timing of Cases
The trials took place from July 2019 through September 2023. By year there were 3 in 2019, 8 in 2020, 3 in 2021, 3 in 2022, and 4 in 2023. Together they made up 27% of the 78 courts-martial at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay in those years.
With 21 cases, a single sentence can change a percentage by several points. Comparisons with the larger service-wide group show direction, not precision.
Limits of the Trial Records
The data reflects only matters that went to court-martial. Orders violations handled through nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action do not appear. The records also do not show the evidence or any plea terms, and they show when a trial happened rather than when the conduct did.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 92 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Courts-martial tried at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay in 2019–2023 that charged Article 92 (21 cases), compared with every Navy and Marine Corps case charging Article 92 in those years.
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.
Related Analysis
- Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay: Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Article 92 (Failure to Obey Order or Regulation): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Installation (hub)
- What Was Tried at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, 2019–2023? 78 Courts-Martial
- What Was Tried at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, 2024–2026? 53 Courts-Martial
- What Was Tried at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, 2017–2018? 31 Courts-Martial
- Orders Violation Charges at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, 2024–2026: Pleas, Verdicts, and Sentences
- Is Navy-Marine Corps Orders Violation Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 92, 2017–2025
- Article 92 explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Military Judges Who Presided Over Article 92 Cases at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, 2019–2023
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.