General Article Charges at San Diego, California, 2024–2026: Pleas, Verdicts, and Sentences

Trends › By Installation › San Diego, California › Article 134, 2024–2026

Based on 26 cases · 2024–2026 · Navy and Marine Corps records · data updated October 24, 2026

Article 134 Cases at San Diego Since 2024

This post covers every court-martial at San Diego, California that charged Article 134 between January 2024 and June 2026. Article 134, the general article, covers a wide range of conduct that other articles do not list separately. The cases in this group therefore involve many different kinds of conduct.

There were 26 cases: 15 in 2024, 6 in 2025, and 5 in 2026, which is a partial year. Together they were 21% of the 126 courts-martial at San Diego in those years.

Punitive Discharges Were Less Common Than the Service Rate

Of 23 enlisted members convicted, 14 received a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge (61%). Across Navy and Marine Corps Article 134 cases, the rate was 75%. Of the 14 punitive discharges here, 9 were dishonorable discharges.

The records also show 1 convicted officer or warrant officer, who was not dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.

How Much Confinement Followed Conviction?

Of 26 cases, 25 ended in a conviction on at least one charge. Of those sentences, 19 included confinement (76%). The median confinement was 1.2 years, shorter than the 1.5 years elsewhere in the Navy and Marine Corps. A quarter of the confinement sentences were 5 years or longer.

These are adjudged sentences, announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. They cover every charge in a case. That matters when Article 134 was charged with more serious offenses.

The median of 1.2 years and the top quarter of 5 years or more are far apart. A small number of long sentences are much longer than the median. The records do not say which charges led to them.

Sentence Lengths at Both Ends

Sentences covered a wide range. Convictions with no confinement were 24%, compared with 21% service-wide. Confinement under 6 months was 20% in both groups. At the top, 5 convictions (20%) carried 5 years or more, compared with 17%.

Confinement of more than 1 year but under 5 years was less common: 20% here, compared with 28% elsewhere. Confinement of 6 months to 1 year was about the same, at 16% compared with 15%. Sentences longer than one year were less common overall: 10 of 25 convictions (40%), compared with 45%.

Sentences by Court Level

General courts-martial tried 16 cases and special courts-martial tried 10. The general share of 62% is about the same as the 65% service-wide. 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.

The median confinement at general courts-martial was 3 years. At special courts-martial it was 2 months. Special courts-martial were contested more often: 40%, compared with 20% at general courts-martial.

How Often Cases Were Contested

Of the 25 records that list a plea, 18 were guilty pleas and 7 were contested, meaning the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. The contested share of 28% is about the same as the 29% across Navy and Marine Corps Article 134 cases.

Other Charges and Rank

Article 134 was the only charge in 14 of the 26 cases. Other articles charged with it included Article 120b (child sexual abuse) in 3 cases, Article 80 (attempt) in 2, Article 128 (assault) in 2, Article 112a (drug offenses) in 2, and Article 108 (military property) in 1.

By rank, junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) were 72% of the accused, NCOs were 24%, and officers were 4%. Across Navy and Marine Corps Article 134 cases, junior enlisted members were 63%. This group was more junior.

Rules in Force for These Trials

Every trial here was after December 28, 2023. Since that date, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses. When every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters.

Both rules depend on the offense date, which these records do not give. This group therefore mixes cases under old and new rules. The records cannot show whether either change affected the results.

What the Records Cannot Show

Only cases that reached trial are counted. Nonjudicial punishment and administrative separations are not included. The records do not describe the evidence or the plea terms.

For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 134 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.