Pleading Guilty to Article 80 in the Navy-Marine Corps: What Sentences Followed?

Trends › By Offense › Article 80 › Pleading Guilty to Article 80 in the Nav

Based on 164 cases · 2017–2025 · Navy and Marine Corps records · data updated October 24, 2026

Other Charges in These Cases

This page covers only guilty pleas in which the charges included Article 80 (attempt). Article 80 was the only charge in 30 of the 164 cases. Most cases also charged other articles: Article 134 (general article) and Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 44 cases each, Article 128 (assault) in 29, Article 112a (drug) in 20, and Article 120 (sexual assault) in 19.

An attempt charge names the offense that was attempted. The other charges show what other conduct was charged. A sentence covers every charge in the case, so the sentence figures below include those other charges.

Median Confinement of 1.1 Years

Confinement was part of 92% of the 164 convictions. The median confinement was 1.1 years, compared with 6 months in all Navy and Marine Corps guilty pleas. A quarter of the sentences were 2.8 years or longer.

Sentences longer than one year followed 78 of 164 convictions (48%), compared with 21% in all guilty pleas. Sentences of more than 1 year and under 5 years made up 35%, compared with 16%. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 12%, compared with 5%. Sentences under 6 months were the most common band in all guilty pleas, at 40%, but made up 15% here.

These are adjudged sentences, announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.

Most Cases Were General Courts-Martial

General courts-martial heard 117 of the 164 cases, and special courts-martial heard 47. The general share, 71%, compares with 37% in all Navy and Marine Corps guilty pleas.

The median confinement was 1.7 years at general courts-martial and 5 months at special 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.

Discharges for Most Enlisted Members

Among 158 convicted enlisted members, 127 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (80%), more often than in all Navy and Marine Corps guilty pleas (60%). Of those, 54 were dishonorable. Only a general court-martial can adjudge a dishonorable discharge, and general courts-martial heard most of these cases.

All 6 convicted officers or warrant officers 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.

Rank of the Accused

The accused were 97 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 61 NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 6 officers or warrant officers. That mix is more senior than all Navy and Marine Corps guilty pleas, where 65% were junior enlisted.

Installations and Years

San Diego, California tried the most of these cases (23). Norfolk, Virginia tried 22, Bremerton, Washington 14, and Camp Pendleton, California and Pearl Harbor, Hawaii 12 each. Together they account for 51% of the cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count alone does not show a problem at any one base.

There were 17 cases in 2017, 17 in 2018, 15 in 2019, 15 in 2020, 41 in 2021, 15 in 2022, 11 in 2023, 18 in 2024, and 15 in 2025. Navy and Marine Corps records before December 2020 often omit the plea. This page counts only records that list a guilty plea, so the counts for earlier years are incomplete.

Law Changes in These Years

The Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. It set fixed panel sizes, brought in written plea agreements, and created judge-alone special courts-martial capped at six months with no punitive discharge. Cases with offenses from before 2019 kept the old rules.

Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the judge sentences within new sentencing parameters. Both depend on the offense date, which the records do not give. Trials from 2024 on include cases under the old and the new rules. The records cannot show whether any change affected these numbers.

What the Records Do Not Show

The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or the plea terms. They do not include cases handled through nonjudicial punishment, administrative separation, or no action.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 80 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: 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.