Did Child Sexual Abuse Cases at San Diego, California Change After 2024?
San Diego, California had 10 courts-martial charging Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 2024–2026, and all 10 ended in a conviction. The median confinement was 1.8 years, shorter than the 7 years in all Navy and Marine Corps Article 120b cases and the 10 years at San Diego in 2013–2018.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Installation › San Diego, California › Article 120b
Short answer: San Diego, California had 10 courts-martial charging Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 2024–2026, and all 10 ended in a conviction. The median confinement was 1.8 years, shorter than the 7 years in all Navy and Marine Corps Article 120b cases and the 10 years at San Diego in 2013–2018. All 8 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge.
Shorter Median Confinement
Of the 10 convictions, 8 included confinement (80%). The median confinement was 1.8 years. In all Navy and Marine Corps Article 120b cases in 2024–2026, the median was 7 years.
The range was wide. Among the sentences that included confinement, a quarter were 9 years or longer. With only 8 terms, a few sentences can move the median. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case.
Every Case at a General Court-Martial
All 10 cases were tried at a general court-martial (100%), the level that can impose long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. In 2013–2018, general courts-martial heard 82% of San Diego Article 120b cases.
A punitive discharge followed 8 of 8 enlisted convictions. A punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. In 2013–2018, the share was 93%.
Pleas and Verdicts
Of the 10 accused, 7 pleaded guilty and 3 contested at least one charge. A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share, 30%, was about the same as the 32% in all Navy and Marine Corps Article 120b cases.
None of the 3 contested cases ended in a full acquittal (0 of 3). In 2013–2018, 2 of 7 contested cases with a verdict ended in a full acquittal.
Other Charges in These Cases
Article 120b was the only charge in 5 of the 10 cases. Across all Navy and Marine Corps Article 120b cases in 2024–2026, 22 of 54 charged it alone. At San Diego, Article 134 (general article) was charged in 3 cases, Article 80 (attempt) in 2, and Article 121 (larceny) and Article 129 (burglary and unlawful entry) in 1 each.
Compared With 2013–2018
The comparison period on this page is 2013–2018, when San Diego had 17 Article 120b cases over 6 years, about 3 a year. In 2024–2026 there were 6 cases in 2024, 0 in 2025, and 4 so far in 2026, a partial year. These 10 cases were 8% of the 126 courts-martial at San Diego in 2024–2026.
The median confinement went from 10 years to 1.8 years. The contested share went from 41% to 30%. Convictions with confinement went from 87% to 80%. These groups are small, so the changes show a direction only.
| 2013–2018 | 2024–2026 | |
|---|---|---|
| Cases | 17 | 10 |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | 41% | 30% |
| Full acquittals (decided contested) | 2 of 7 | 0 of 3 |
| Convictions with confinement | 87% | 80% |
| Median confinement | 10 years | 1.8 years |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 93% | 8 of 8 |
| General courts-martial | 82% | 100% |
A Covered Offense Under the 2023 Rules
Article 120b is a covered offense. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. When every guilty finding in a case is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence under new sentencing parameters.
Both rules depend on the offense date, and the records give only the trial date. The 2024–2026 cases therefore include some under the old rules and some under the new ones. The records cannot show whether the rules affected any outcome.
Limits of the Records
The records show charges, pleas, findings, and sentences. They do not show the evidence, the plea terms, or conduct handled outside a court-martial.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 120b on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Courts-martial tried at San Diego, California that charged Article 120b (found guilty, not guilty, or both): 2013–2018 (17) and 2024–2026 (10). Comparisons use every Navy and Marine Corps case charging Article 120b in 2024–2026.
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
- San Diego, California: Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Article 120b (Rape and Sexual Assault of a Child): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Installation (hub)
- San Diego, California Courts-Martial, 2013–2018: What 285 Cases Show (the whole docket)
- Inside 173 Courts-Martial at San Diego, California, 2019–2023 (the whole docket)
- San Diego, California Courts-Martial, 2024–2026: What 126 Cases Show (the whole docket)
- Article 120b at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina Before and After 2019 (same offense, another installation)
- Child Sexual Abuse Cases at Okinawa, Japan: 2017–2018 vs. 2019–2022 (same offense, another installation)
- Fewer or More? Child Sexual Abuse Charges at Navy-Marine Corps Courts-Martial, 2017–2025
- Article 120b explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Military Judges Who Presided Over Article 120b Cases at San Diego, California, 2024–2026
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.
Compare: federal court. Child Sexual Abuse and Enticement: Federal Cases vs. Article 120b Courts-Martial
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.