MCAS Miramar, California vs. Washington, D.C.: Two Navy-Marine Corps Installations Side by Side, 2019–2023
MCAS Miramar, California had 42 courts-martial from 2019–2023, and Washington, D.C. had 41. Article 92, failure to obey an order or regulation, was charged in 28% of Miramar cases, compared with 8% in Washington, D.C.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › By Installation › MCAS Miramar, California › vs. Washington, D.C.
Short answer: MCAS Miramar, California had 42 courts-martial from 2019–2023, and Washington, D.C. had 41. Article 92, failure to obey an order or regulation, was charged in 28% of Miramar cases, compared with 8% in Washington, D.C. The median confinement was 6 months at Miramar and 8 months in Washington, D.C.
Orders Violations Were Charged More Often at Miramar
40 of the 42 Miramar records list the charges. One case can count under several articles. Article 128, assault, was the most common charge, in 12 cases (30%), compared with 25% in Washington, D.C. Article 92 was next, in 11 cases (28%), compared with 8%.
Article 107, false official statements, appeared in 15% of Miramar cases and 8% of Washington, D.C. cases. Two charges were less common at Miramar. Article 112a, the drug article, appeared in 12% of cases, compared with 28%. Article 134, the general article, appeared in 18%, compared with 25%. Article 121, larceny, was charged in 10% of cases at both locations.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Washington, D.C. cases |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 128 Assault | 12 | 30% | 25% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 11 | 28% | 8% |
| Art. 134 General article | 7 | 18% | 25% |
| Art. 107 False official statements | 6 | 15% | 8% |
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 5 | 12% | 28% |
| Art. 121 Larceny | 4 | 10% | 10% |
| Art. 120 Rape and sexual assault | 3 | 8% | 12% |
| Art. 128b Domestic violence | 2 | 5% | 2% |
A Smaller Share of General Courts-Martial
A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. At Miramar, 16 of the 42 cases were general courts-martial (38%). In Washington, D.C., the general share was 66%.
In the 16 Miramar general courts-martial, 92% of convictions included confinement, and the median was 1.3 years. In the 26 special courts-martial, 64% of convictions included confinement, and the median was 3 months.
Confinement and Sentence Length
38 Miramar cases ended in a conviction, and 74% of those sentences included confinement. The median confinement was 6 months, compared with 8 months in Washington, D.C. A quarter of the confinement terms were 1.2 years or longer.
Sentences of more than one year were 7 of 38 convictions at Miramar (18%), compared with 29% in Washington, D.C. Sentences of 5 years or more were 3% at Miramar and 18% in Washington, D.C. No confinement was more common at Miramar: 26% of convictions, compared with 12%.
These are adjudged sentences, the sentences announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. They cover every charge in the case. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, Washington, D.C. |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 10 | 26% | 12% |
| Under 6 months | 10 | 26% | 32% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 11 | 29% | 26% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 6 | 16% | 12% |
| 5 years or more | 1 | 3% | 18% |
Punitive Discharges
A punitive discharge is a bad-conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge for an enlisted member. At Miramar, 66% of enlisted convictions ended with one: 18 bad-conduct discharges and 7 dishonorable discharges. In Washington, D.C., the share was 59%.
A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation, which these records do not cover.
Pleas and Contested Verdicts
Only 20 of the 42 Miramar records list the plea. Navy and Marine Corps records before December 2020 often omit the plea and forum, so these counts use only the records that list them. Of the 20, 14 were guilty pleas and 6 were not-guilty or mixed pleas. A case with either of those pleas counts as contested.
The contested share was 30% at Miramar and 38% in Washington, D.C. At Miramar, 0 of 6 contested cases that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal. In Washington, D.C., 7 of 15 did. These are small counts.
| Installation | Cases | Contested | Full acquittals (decided contested) | Median confinement | Punitive discharge (enlisted) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MCAS Miramar, California | 42 | 30% | 0 of 6 | 6 months | 66% |
| Washington, D.C. | 41 | 38% | 7 of 15 | 8 months | 59% |
Results for Assault and Orders Charges
Article 128 ended in a conviction on that article in 11 of 12 cases (92%). Article 92 did so in 10 of 11 cases (91%). When the conviction included Article 128, the median confinement was 6 months. For Article 92, it was 4 months.
A conviction on one article and an acquittal on another can happen in the same case. A case can also include both articles, so the rows overlap.
| Article | Cases charging it | Convicted of it (share) | Median confinement when convicted of it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 128 Assault | 12 | 11 (92%) | 6 months |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 11 | 10 (91%) | 4 months |
Rank of the Accused
Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) were 53% of the accused at Miramar, and NCOs were 47%. No officers appear (0%). In Washington, D.C., junior enlisted members were 49% of the accused.
Cases by Year
The Miramar records cover January 2019 to December 2023. There were 14 cases in 2019, 8 in 2020, 4 in 2021, 9 in 2022, and 7 in 2023. The two locations tried a similar number of cases, so this page compares shares, not counts. With groups this small, a few cases can change a share by several points.
What the Records Do Not Cover
The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or the terms of plea agreements. Nonjudicial punishment and administrative separations are not included.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Every court-martial tried at MCAS Miramar, California (42) and Washington, D.C. (41) with trial dates in 2019–2023. Each figure for MCAS Miramar, California is set beside the same figure for Washington, D.C..
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
- MCAS Miramar, California: Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Washington, D.C.: Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Installation (hub)
- Bremerton, Washington vs. Camp Pendleton, California: Two Navy-Marine Corps Installations Side by Side, 2013–2018
- Bremerton, Washington vs. Okinawa, Japan: Two Navy-Marine Corps Installations Side by Side, 2019–2023
- Camp Lejeune, North Carolina and Norfolk, Virginia, 2024–2026: How Their Courts-Martial Compare
- Camp Pendleton, California and San Diego, California, 2024–2026: How Their Courts-Martial Compare
- Comparing Camp Lejeune, North Carolina and Mayport, Florida: Navy-Marine Corps Courts-Martial, 2013–2018
- Comparing Camp Pendleton, California and Camp Lejeune, North Carolina: Navy-Marine Corps Courts-Martial, 2019–2023
- Comparing Norfolk, Virginia and San Diego, California: Navy-Marine Corps Courts-Martial, 2019–2023
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at MCAS Miramar, California, 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.