> ## 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. # Smaller Army Installations: 153 Courts-Martial Together - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/smaller-army-installations-courts-martial/ - Published: 2026-10-30T05:31:05.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-30T08:20:51.000Z - Description: The records hold 153 courts-martial from 2020–2026 at Army installations with fewer than 20 cases each. - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Army [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) › Smaller Army installations **Short answer:** The records hold 153 courts-martial from 2020–2026 at Army installations with fewer than 20 cases each. Among convicted enlisted members in this group, 56% received a punitive discharge, compared with 73% in the Army as a whole, and Article 107 (false official statements) was charged in 13% of cases, against 7%. Based on 153 cases · 2020–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## Fewer Punitive Discharges A punitive discharge followed 56% of enlisted convictions at these smaller installations: 49 bad-conduct discharges and 15 dishonorable discharges. Across the Army as a whole, the share was 73%. 19 convicted officers or warrant officers appear in the group, and 11 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. ## A More Senior Group of Accused Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) made up 37% of the accused, NCOs 47%, and officers 16%. Across the Army as a whole, junior enlisted members were 55% of the accused. The installations with the most cases in the group were Fort Meade (19), Fort Gordon (18), Fort Jackson (17), Joint Base Langley-Eustis (16), and Central Command (CENTCOM) (15). Together these five account for 56% of the 153 cases. Each installation in the group had fewer than 20 cases in the data. ## False Statement and Orders Charges 148 of the 153 records list the charges, and one case can appear under several articles. Article 107 was charged in 19 cases (13%), compared with 7% in the Army as a whole. Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) was charged in 26 cases (18%), against 13%. Article 128 (assault) and Article 134 (the general article) were each charged in 36 cases (24%). Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 18% of cases, the same share as the Army as a whole. Article 120 (rape and sexual assault) appeared in 16%, against 19%. | UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Army as a whole | | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----- | ---------- | -------------------------- | | [Art. 128](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-128/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Assault | 36 | 24% | 26% | | [Art. 134](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-134/?ref=bodiesburied.com) General article | 36 | 24% | 22% | | [Art. 128b](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-128b-domestic-violence/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Domestic violence | 26 | 18% | 18% | | [Art. 92](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-92/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Failure to obey order or regulation | 26 | 18% | 13% | | [Art. 120](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-120-sexual-assault/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Rape and sexual assault | 24 | 16% | 19% | | [Art. 107](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-107/?ref=bodiesburied.com) False official statements | 19 | 13% | 7% | | [Art. 121](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-121/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Larceny | 12 | 8% | 7% | | [Art. 112a](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-112a-drug-offenses/?ref=bodiesburied.com) Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 10 | 7% | 8% | ## Guilty Pleas and Plea Agreements 151 of the 153 records list the plea. 113 accused pleaded guilty and 38 entered a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share, 25%, compares with 29% for the Army as a whole. 106 of the 113 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement, and 7 have no entry. Army records say whether there was an agreement, not what it said. Cases charging Article 134 ended in a guilty plea 78% of the time (28 of 36), the most among the top charges. Cases charging Article 128b ended in a guilty plea 50% of the time (13 of 26). The records do not say why an accused pleaded guilty or contested the charges. ## Verdicts in Contested Cases Full acquittals came in 33% of the 36 decided contested cases, lower than the 38% for the Army as a whole. 17 more cases ended in a partial acquittal, meaning not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another. Army results list findings charge by charge, which is why partial acquittals are common in Army records. The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Members heard 25 of the 38 contested cases (66%). In contested cases, members acquitted in full 39% of the time and military judges 23%. Because the accused chooses the forum in most cases, the two groups of cases are not alike. ## Confinement After a Conviction Of 136 convictions, 106 carried confinement. The median confinement was 6 months, the same as for the Army as a whole. A quarter of the confinement terms were 1.8 years or longer. 30 convictions carried no confinement (22%), compared with 16% Army-wide. 35 of the 136 convictions brought more than one year of confinement (26%), against 29%. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and each covers every charge in the case. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, the Army as a whole | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | -------------------------- | | No confinement | 30 | 22% | 16% | | Under 6 months | 53 | 39% | 39% | | 6 months to 1 year | 18 | 13% | 17% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 27 | 20% | 20% | | 5 years or more | 8 | 6% | 8% | ## Charge-Level Results Article 92 ended in a conviction on that article in 25 of 26 cases (96%), the highest rate among the top charges, with a median confinement of 5 months. Article 128b had the lowest rate: 18 of 26 cases (69%), with a median of 8 months. Article 134 ended in a conviction in 30 of 36 cases (83%), with a median of 1 year, and Article 128 in 29 of 36 (81%), with a median of 5 months. One case can include a conviction on one article and an acquittal on another, so the rows overlap. | Article | Cases charging it | Convicted of it (share) | Median confinement when convicted of it | | ------------------------------------------- | ----------------- | ----------------------- | --------------------------------------- | | Art. 128 Assault | 36 | 29 (81%) | 5 months | | Art. 134 General article | 36 | 30 (83%) | 1 year | | Art. 128b Domestic violence | 26 | 18 (69%) | 8 months | | Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 26 | 25 (96%) | 5 months | ## Court Level, Years, and Limits 94 of the 150 cases with a court level listed were general courts-martial (63%), compared with 72% for the Army as a whole. They produced a median confinement of 1 year, and 32% were contested. The 56 special courts-martial, which cap confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge, produced a median of 2 months, and 14% were contested. The level is not listed for 3 cases. The data runs from October 2020 through September 2026\. By year, the count was 4 in 2020, 22 in 2021, 28 in 2022, 21 in 2023, 20 in 2024, 33 in 2025, and 25 in 2026\. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021, and the 2026 count is a partial year. The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence and do not include nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/). ### How We Counted Army courts-martial at 19 installations that each have fewer than 20 cases in the data (153 cases together). 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 - [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) (hub) - [Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-courts-martial/) (hub) - [120 Courts-Martial in Joint Base San Antonio, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-in-joint-base-san-antonio-2016-2025/) - [Courts-Martial in Europe: How the Services Compare, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-in-europe-2016-2025/) - [Courts-Martial in Hawaii: How the Services Compare, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-in-hawaii-2016-2025/) - [Courts-Martial in Japan and Guam: How the Services Compare, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-in-japan-and-guam-2016-2025/) - [Smaller Air Force Installations: 177 Courts-Martial Together](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/smaller-air-force-installations-courts-martial/) - [Smaller Navy-Marine Corps Installations: 112 Courts-Martial Together](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/smaller-navy-marine-corps-installations-courts-martial/) - [What Was Tried in Alaska? Courts-Martial 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-in-alaska-2016-2025/) - [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members) **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.