Navy-Marine Corps Article 87 Cases by the Numbers, 2017–2025

Trends › By Offense › Article 87 › Navy-Marine Corps

Based on 21 cases · 2017–2025 · Navy and Marine Corps records · data updated October 24, 2026

A Rare Charge

Missing movement covers a service member who misses the departure of a ship, aircraft, or unit they were required to move with. In the Navy and Marine Corps records from March 2017 to December 2025, 21 courts-martial included it, 1% of the 3,740 courts-martial in those years.

There were 3 cases in each year from 2017 through 2019 and 5 in 2020, the most in any year. There were 4 in 2021, 2 in 2022, 0 in 2023, 0 in 2024, and 1 in 2025. In 2017–2019, Article 87 was part of 9 of 1243 convictions with offenses listed (1%). In 2023–2025, it was part of 1 of 940 (0%). As a share of all convictions, that is about the same. The charge was uncommon in every year.

Year by Year at a Glance

The yearly shares use convictions with the offenses listed, so years with more or fewer cases are comparable. Every year from 2017 to 2022 shows a 1% share, and 2023 through 2025 show 0%. With counts this low, a single case can change a year's figure.

Almost Every Case Ended in a Guilty Plea

The plea is listed in 18 of the 21 records: 16 guilty pleas and 2 contested cases. A case counts as contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge, with a not-guilty or mixed plea.

The contested share, 11%, is lower than the 32% across the Navy and Marine Corps. Navy and Marine Corps records before December 2020 often omit the plea, so those counts use only the records that list it.

Other Charges in These Cases

Article 87 was the only charge in 2 of the 21 cases. The most common other charge was Article 86 (AWOL), in 12 cases. Article 112a (drug) appeared in 9 and Article 85 (desertion) in 8. Article 107 (false official statement) appeared in 3 and Article 121a (fraudulent use of credit or debit cards) in 2.

A sentence covers every charge in a case, so the sentences described below are for the whole case, not missing movement alone.

Short Confinement in Almost Every Case

All 21 cases ended in a conviction on at least one charge, and 20 of those sentences included confinement (95%). The median confinement was 3 months, shorter than the 6-month median across the Navy and Marine Corps. A quarter of the sentences were 4 months or longer.

Most sentences were under 6 months: 81% of convictions here, compared with 35% across the service. Only 1 of 21 convictions (5%) carried more than one year, compared with 25% across the service, and none was 5 years or more. These are adjudged sentences, announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.

How Many Received a Punitive Discharge?

Among 20 convicted enlisted members, 10 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (50%), less often than the 62% across the Navy and Marine Corps. Only 1 of those 10 was dishonorable. The 1 convicted officer or warrant officer in this group was dismissed.

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

Rank and Court Level

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 90% of the accused, compared with 63% across the Navy and Marine Corps. NCOs and officers each made up 5%. General courts-martial, the level that can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge, accounted for 3 of the 21 cases (14%). The rest were special courts-martial, which cap confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.

Sentences that only a general court-martial can impose were also uncommon in this group. Only 1 conviction carried more than one year of confinement, and only 1 discharge was dishonorable.

Rule Changes Across the Period

The Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. It set fixed panel sizes, created judge-alone special courts-martial capped at six months with no punitive discharge, and introduced written plea agreements. Cases with offenses from before 2019 kept the old rules. When every guilty finding involves an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters.

These rules depend on offense dates, which the records do not give. The records also do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled outside a court-martial. They cannot show whether any rule change affected these counts.

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.