MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           10 October 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002077445

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he served from December 1986 until February 1989.  He acknowledges that his behavior was inappropriate and that he deserved to be punished for his actions.  Prior to the check cashing episode, he was performing his military duties effectively and was even awarded the Army Achievement Medal.  The behavior which resulted in his being disciplined was out of character for him.  He believes that the punishment he received in the form of a bad conduct discharge was far too severe considering the fact the court-martial was the only major disciplinary action taken against him while he was in the Army.  He provides his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  That he concurs with the applicant's request to upgrade his discharge.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 December 1986.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91A (Medical Specialist).  

On 17 December 1987, the applicant was given a letter of reprimand for having a urine sample that tested positive for marijuana.  

On 6 July 1988, the applicant pleaded guilty to and was convicted by a general court-martial of six specifications of forgery (offenses committed on 20, 26, and 27 February 1988 and on 3, 4, and 5 March 1988).  His approved sentence was confinement for 9 months (pursuant to a pre-trial agreement), reduction to pay grade E-1, and a bad conduct discharge.  On 20 October 1988, the U. S. Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.

The applicant was released from confinement on 23 February 1989 and placed on involuntary excess leave on 24 February 1989.  He was discharged with a bad conduct discharge on 30 March 1989 pursuant to his sentence by court-martial.  He had completed 1 year, 7 months, and 9 days of creditable active service and had 176 days of lost time.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

3.  The Board notes that the applicant was not convicted of an isolated offense but for six specifications of forging checks committed on six different days.  Those offenses were not his first instance of misconduct; he received a letter of reprimand for drug use in December 1987.  The Board notes that he did not serve creditably from December 1986 - March 1989; after 5 July 1988 he was either in confinement or on involuntary excess leave.  

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__RJW__  __RWA__  __JTM__  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077445	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/10/10	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	BCD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1989/03/30	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	105.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.