> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Shaw AFB, South Carolina, 2019–2023: Charges, Verdicts, and Sentences in 29 Cases
- URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/shaw-afb-south-carolina-courts-martial-2019-2023/
- Published: 2026-10-28T06:31:50.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-30T08:03:24.000Z
- Description: Shaw AFB, South Carolina held 29 courts-martial from 2019–2023. Drug offenses (Article 112a) were charged in 64% of cases with charges listed, compared with 41% across the Air Force. Only 18% of cases with a plea listed were contested, compared with 50% Air Force-wide.
- Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart
- Tags: Understanding Trends, Shaw AFB, South Carolina, Air Force

[Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) › [Shaw AFB, South Carolina](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-shaw-afb-south-carolina/) › 2019–2023

**Short answer:** Shaw AFB, South Carolina held 29 courts-martial from 2019–2023\. Drug offenses (Article 112a) were charged in 64% of cases with charges listed, compared with 41% across the Air Force. Only 18% of cases with a plea listed were contested, compared with 50% Air Force-wide.

Based on 29 cases · 2019–2023 · Air Force records · data updated October 24, 2026

## Drug Charges Were the Most Common

25 of the 29 records list the charges. Article 112a, which covers wrongful use and possession of controlled substances, was charged in 16 of those cases. That is 64%, compared with 41% across all Air Force courts-martial in the same years. It is the only article charged notably more often here.

Article 134 (the general article) was the next most common charge, in 6 cases (24%), compared with 21% Air Force-wide. Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) and Article 128 (assault) were each charged in 4 cases. Article 120 (rape and sexual assault) was charged in 2 cases (8%), compared with 11% across the service. Each article counts once per case, so a case with several charges appears under each of them.

| UCMJ Article                                                                                                                                       | Cases | Share here | Share, the whole Air Force docket |
| -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ---------- | --------------------------------- |
| [Art. 112a](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-112a-drug-offenses/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 16    | 64%        | 41%                               |
| [Art. 134](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com) General article                           | 6     | 24%        | 21%                               |
| [Art. 92](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-92/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Failure to obey order or regulation         | 4     | 16%        | 16%                               |
| [Art. 128](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-128/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Assault                                   | 4     | 16%        | 19%                               |
| [Art. 121](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-121/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Larceny                                   | 2     | 8%         | 4%                                |
| [Art. 128b](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-128b-domestic-violence/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Domestic violence                             | 2     | 8%         | 5%                                |
| [Art. 120](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-120-sexual-assault/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Rape and sexual assault                            | 2     | 8%         | 11%                               |
| Art. 133 Conduct unbecoming an officer                                                                                                             | 1     | 4%         | 1%                                |

## Most Cases Were Guilty Pleas

22 records list a plea. 18 show a guilty plea, and 4 show a contested case. A contested case is one where the accused pleaded not guilty to at least 1 charge. The contested share was 18%, compared with 50% across the Air Force.

Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list a guilty plea, so some records here have no plea entry. Air Force records also never report plea agreements. The records cannot show how many of these guilty pleas came with a plea agreement.

## Median Confinement Was 3 Months

All 25 convictions included confinement. The median confinement was 3 months, close to the 4 months Air Force-wide. A quarter of the sentences were 5 months or longer.

19 convictions (76%) had confinement under 6 months. Only 2 of 25 convictions (8%) had confinement longer than one year, compared with 23% in the rest of the Air Force. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement. A special court-martial is capped at one year.

These are adjudged sentences. They are the sentences announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case.

| Adjudged confinement            | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force cases in those years |
| ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ----------------------------------------- |
| No confinement                  | 0           | 0%         | 12%                                       |
| Under 6 months                  | 19          | 76%        | 50%                                       |
| 6 months to 1 year              | 4           | 16%        | 15%                                       |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 1           | 4%         | 17%                                       |
| 5 years or more                 | 1           | 4%         | 6%                                        |

## How Often Did a Punitive Discharge Follow?

A punitive discharge is a bad-conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge for an enlisted member. The officer equivalent is a dismissal. 9 of 23 convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge (39%), less often than the 56% Air Force-wide. 2 of those 9 were dishonorable discharges. 2 officers or warrant officers were convicted, and both were sentenced to dismissal.

A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation. These records do not include administrative separations.

## General and Special Courts-Martial

Special courts-martial heard 17 of the 29 cases. A special court-martial can adjudge no more than one year of confinement and no dishonorable discharge. General courts-martial heard 12 cases (41%). A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence.

The median confinement was 5 months at general courts-martial and 2 months at special courts-martial. The contested share was 27% at general courts-martial and 9% at special courts-martial.

Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) were 72% of the accused, compared with 64% in the rest of the Air Force. NCOs were 21%, and officers were 7%.

## Cannon AFB and Davis-Monthan AFB

Cannon AFB, New Mexico and Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona each held 29 cases in the same years. Both had higher contested shares than Shaw: 84% at Cannon and 56% at Davis-Monthan, compared with 18% at Shaw.

The median confinement was 1.2 years at Cannon and 6 months at Davis-Monthan. Both are longer than the 3 months at Shaw. The punitive discharge rate for convicted enlisted members was 69% at Cannon and 59% at Davis-Monthan, both higher than the 39% at Shaw.

| Installation               | Cases | Contested | Full acquittals (decided contested) | Median confinement | Punitive discharge (enlisted) |
| -------------------------- | ----- | --------- | ----------------------------------- | ------------------ | ----------------------------- |
| Shaw AFB, South Carolina   | 29    | 18%       | 3 of 4                              | 3 months           | 39%                           |
| Cannon AFB, New Mexico     | 29    | 84%       | 9 of 16                             | 1.2 years          | 69%                           |
| Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona | 29    | 56%       | 5 of 9                              | 6 months           | 59%                           |

## Acquittals and Who Decided Guilt

4 of the 29 cases ended in a full acquittal (14%), compared with 24% Air Force-wide. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list guilty pleas. For that reason, this rate is measured against all cases, not only contested cases.

A military judge alone decided 27 cases. Members heard 2 cases: 1 enlisted panel and 1 officer panel. That is 7% of the cases, compared with 38% Air Force-wide. The accused usually chooses whether a judge or members decide guilt. Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas, so the low share of member panels follows the low contested share.

## Year by Year, and 2016–2018

The data holds 29 cases from April 2019 to June 2023: 3 in 2019, 9 in 2020, 5 in 2021, 6 in 2022, and 6 in 2023\. That is 2% of the 1,361 Air Force courts-martial in those years.

Shaw had 18 cases in 2016–2018, about 6 a year. That is the same yearly rate as in 2019–2023\. The median confinement was 10 months in the earlier period and 3 months in the later one. Punitive discharges for convicted enlisted members were 64% and 39%. The general court-martial share was 67% and 41%. Convictions with confinement were 67% and 100%. In small groups, a few cases can move a percentage, so these changes show direction, not precision.

|                               | 2016–2018 | 2019–2023 |
| ----------------------------- | --------- | --------- |
| Cases                         | 18        | 29        |
| Contested (of pleas recorded) | —         | 18%       |
| Convictions with confinement  | 67%       | 100%      |
| Median confinement            | 10 months | 3 months  |
| Punitive discharge (enlisted) | 64%       | 39%       |
| General courts-martial        | 67%       | 41%       |

## What the Records Do Not Show

These records cover only cases tried by court-martial. They do not include nonjudicial punishment, administrative separations, or cases closed with no action. They do not describe the evidence or the plea terms. Air Force records also rarely list charges in full acquittals.

Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/).

### How We Counted

Every court-martial in the data tried at Shaw AFB, South Carolina with a trial date in 2019–2023 (29 cases), compared with all 1,361 Air Force trials in those years. Dates are trial dates.

Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.

## Related Analysis

- [Shaw AFB, South Carolina: Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-shaw-afb-south-carolina/) (hub)
- [Air Force Courts-Martial: Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/air-force-courts-martial/) (hub)
- [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) (hub)
- [Inside 29 Courts-Martial at Cannon AFB, New Mexico, 2019–2023](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/cannon-afb-new-mexico-courts-martial-2019-2023/) (same years, similar size)
- [Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona Courts-Martial, 2019–2023: What 29 Cases Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/davis-monthan-afb-arizona-courts-martial-2019-2023/) (same years, similar size)
- [Andersen AFB, Guam Courts-Martial, 2016–2018: What 13 Cases Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/andersen-afb-guam-courts-martial-2016-2018/)
- [Aviano AB, Italy Courts-Martial, 2016–2018: What 16 Cases Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/aviano-ab-italy-courts-martial-2016-2018/)
- [Aviano AB, Italy, 2019–2023: Charges, Verdicts, and Sentences in 17 Cases](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/aviano-ab-italy-courts-martial-2019-2023/)
- [Barksdale AFB, Louisiana, 2016–2018: Charges, Verdicts, and Sentences in 27 Cases](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/barksdale-afb-louisiana-courts-martial-2016-2018/)
- [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members)

## Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at Shaw AFB, South Carolina, 2019–2023

- [Bryon T. Gleisner](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-bryon-t-gleisner/)
- [Jason M. Kellhofer](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-jason-m-kellhofer/)
- [James E. Key III](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-james-e-key-iii/)
- [Matthew N. McCall](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-matthew-n-mccall/)
- [Mark W. Milam](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-mark-w-milam/)
- [Julie L. Pitvorec](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-julie-l-pitvorec/)
- [Joshua D. Rosen](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-joshua-d-rosen/)
- [Michael A. Schrama](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-michael-a-schrama/)
- [Shaun S. Speranza](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-shaun-s-speranza/)
- [Bryan D. Watson](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-bryan-d-watson/)
- [Pilar G. Wennrich](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-pilar-g-wennrich/)
- [Charles E. Wiedie Jr.](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-charles-e-wiedie-jr/)

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](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judges/) 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](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.