Travis AFB, California Courts-Martial, 2016–2018: What 21 Cases Show
Travis AFB, California held 21 courts-martial from 2016–2018. Drug offenses (Article 112a) were charged in 69% of cases with charges listed, compared with 48% across the Air Force. The median confinement was 45 days, compared with 4 months for all Air Force cases.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 6 min read
Trends › By Installation › Travis AFB, California › 2016–2018
Short answer: Travis AFB, California held 21 courts-martial from 2016–2018. Drug offenses (Article 112a) were charged in 69% of cases with charges listed, compared with 48% across the Air Force. The median confinement was 45 days, compared with 4 months for all Air Force cases.
Median Confinement Was 45 Days
13 of 16 convictions included confinement. The median confinement was 45 days, shorter than the 4-month median across the Air Force. A quarter of the sentences were 4 months or longer. The median counts only the sentences that included confinement.
These are adjudged sentences. They are the sentences announced at trial, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each one covers every charge in the case, so a sentence can reflect several offenses.
Drug Charges Were the Most Common
16 of the 21 records list the charges. Article 112a, wrongful use or possession of controlled substances, appeared in 11 of them (69%). Across all Air Force cases in those years, the share was 48%. Because so many cases included a drug charge, the sentence and discharge figures on this page mostly describe drug cases.
Article 86 (AWOL) and Article 121 (larceny) each appeared in 2 cases (12%), compared with 4% and 7% across the service. Article 85 (desertion), Article 93 (cruelty and maltreatment), Article 128 (assault), and Article 92 (failure to obey an order or regulation) each appeared once. Assault and orders violations were charged less often here than across the service, where the shares were 11% and 16%. 1 case can appear under several articles.
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the Air Force as a whole |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 112a Wrongful use, possession of controlled substances | 11 | 69% | 48% |
| Art. 86 AWOL | 2 | 12% | 4% |
| Art. 121 Larceny | 2 | 12% | 7% |
| Art. 85 Desertion | 1 | 6% | 1% |
| Art. 93 Cruelty and maltreatment | 1 | 6% | 0% |
| Art. 111 Drunken or reckless driving | 1 | 6% | 4% |
| Art. 128 Assault | 1 | 6% | 11% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 1 | 6% | 16% |
Officer Panels Heard 10 Cases
The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. At Travis, a military judge alone decided 11 of 21 cases (52%). Members heard the other 10. All 10 were officer panels, and 0 were enlisted panels.
Most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas, so a higher share of member panels usually goes with more contested cases. Air Force records from these years rarely list guilty pleas, so the contested share here cannot be measured.
Full Acquittals
5 of the 21 cases ended in a full acquittal (24%), compared with 20% across the Air Force. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list the plea when the accused pleaded guilty. For that reason, this rate is measured against all cases, not only contested cases.
Air Force records also rarely list the charges in full acquittals. The charge table may leave out cases that ended in a full acquittal.
Punitive Discharges
A punitive discharge is a bad-conduct discharge or a dishonorable discharge for an enlisted member. The officer equivalent is a dismissal. 36% of convicted enlisted members at Travis received a punitive discharge. All 5 were bad-conduct discharges, and 0 were dishonorable discharges. Across the Air Force, the share was 55%.
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.
Rank and Court Level
Junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4) were 43% of the accused, compared with 63% across the Air Force. NCOs were 38%, and officers were 19%.
General courts-martial heard 8 of the 21 cases (38%), compared with 47% service-wide. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial can adjudge no more than one year of confinement and no dishonorable discharge.
Dyess AFB and Hill AFB
Dyess AFB, Texas held 21 Air Force cases in the same years, and Hill AFB, Utah held 20. The median confinement was 3 months at Dyess and 6 months at Hill. Both are longer than the 45 days at Travis.
The punitive discharge rate for convicted enlisted members was 41% at Dyess and 53% at Hill. Both are higher than the 36% at Travis. None of the 3 bases has a usable contested share for these years.
| Installation | Cases | Contested | Full acquittals (decided contested) | Median confinement | Punitive discharge (enlisted) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Travis AFB, California | 21 | — | — | 45 days | 36% |
| Dyess AFB, Texas | 21 | — | — | 3 months | 41% |
| Hill AFB, Utah | 20 | — | — | 6 months | 53% |
Years, Rules, and Limits
The data covers March 2016 to December 2018. There were 6 cases in 2016, 9 in 2017, and 6 in 2018. That is 2% of the 991 Air Force courts-martial in those years.
All of these trials took place before the Military Justice Act of 2016 took effect on January 1, 2019. That law set fixed panel sizes, created judge-alone special courts-martial capped at six months with no punitive discharge, and introduced written plea agreements. None of those changes applied to the cases here.
Air Force records never report plea agreements. The records also do not describe the evidence, and they do not include nonjudicial punishment or administrative separations.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Every court-martial in the data tried at Travis AFB, California with a trial date in 2016–2018 (21 cases), compared with all 991 Air Force trials in those years. Dates are trial dates.
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
- Travis AFB, California: Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Air Force Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- By Installation (hub)
- Inside 22 Courts-Martial at Travis AFB, California, 2019–2023 (another period)
- Dyess AFB, Texas Courts-Martial, 2016–2018: What 21 Cases Show (same years, similar size)
- Inside 20 Courts-Martial at Hill AFB, Utah, 2016–2018 (same years, similar size)
- Drug Cases at Travis AFB, California: 2016–2018 vs. 2019–2022
- Andersen AFB, Guam Courts-Martial, 2016–2018: What 13 Cases Show
- Aviano AB, Italy Courts-Martial, 2016–2018: What 16 Cases Show
- Aviano AB, Italy, 2019–2023: Charges, Verdicts, and Sentences in 17 Cases
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at Travis AFB, California, 2016–2018
- John C. Degnan
- Joseph S. Imburgia
- Andrew Kalavanos
- Richard D. Mink
- Jennifer E. Powell
- Natalie D. Richardson
- Mark F. Rosenow
- Shelly W. Schools
- Christopher M. Schumann
- Brendon K. Tukey
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.
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.