Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802921
Original file (9802921.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02921
                 INDEX CODE:  110.00

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His dishonorable discharge be upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His only crime was cashing a $10 check, with insufficient funds;  and,
going to the NCO Club  with  another  member’s  club  card,  with  his
permission.  He has never committed or been charged  with  any  crimes
since leaving the Air Force.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of his WD  AGO
Form 53 (Enlisted Record and  Report  of  Separation)  and  additional
documents associated with the issues cited in his contentions (Exhibit
A).
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant's military personnel records reflect that he enlisted in the
Regular Air Force on 26 March 1946 for  3  years.   He  was  honorably
discharged on 25 January 1949.  On 20 June 1949, he reenlisted in  the
Regular Air Force for a period of 3 years.

On 6 April 1950, applicant was tried and found guilty before a summary
court-martial at Chanute AFB,  IL,  for  being  absent  without  leave
(AWOL) from 1 April to 6 April 1950, in violation of the 61st  Article
of War.  He was sentenced to reduction in grade to  private,  15  days
restriction and forfeiture of $25 of his pay.

On 2  August  1950,  the  applicant  was  issued  a  letter  of  “Non-
Conformance with Air Force Standards” by his commander for being  late
for work on 8 July and 24 July 1950 and for being drunk and disorderly
on 31 July 1950.

On 9 August 1950, applicant  was  tried  and  found  guilty  before  a
summary court-martial at Williams AFB, AZ, for breaking restriction by
going to Phoenix, AZ, on or about 31 Jul 50, in violation of the  96th
Article of War.  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor  for  1
month and forfeiture of $50 of his pay.

On 18 August 1950, applicant was  tried  and  found  guilty  before  a
summary court-martial at Williams AFB for threatening language  toward
an NCO while in execution of  his  office  and  for  being  drunk  and
disorderly in station, on or about 6 August 1950.  He was sentenced to
confinement at hard labor for 1 month and forfeiture  of  $50  of  his
pay.

On 18 April 1951, applicant  was  tried  and  found  guilty  before  a
summary court-martial at Williams AFB for being drunk  and  disorderly
in uniform in a public place, to wit; the Post Exchange Cafeteria,  in
violation of the 96th Article of War.  He was sentenced  to  reduction
in grade from private first class  to  private,  confinement  at  hard
labor for 1 month and forfeiture of $50 of his pay.

On 5 October 1951, applicant was  tried  and  found  guilty  before  a
summary court-martial at Williams AFB for breaking restriction, on  or
about 1 October 1951, in violation  of  Article  134,  UCMJ.   He  was
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for one month and forfeiture of
$50.

On 17 January 1952, applicant was tried  and  found  guilty  before  a
general court-martial at Williams AFB for violation  of  Article  121,
UCMJ: Specifications were: stealing about $10 from the VFW  “Foxhole”,
on or about 16 August 1951; $5 from the “White House,” on or about  17
August 1951; $10 from Frank D--- and $10 from Vincenczo  M---,  on  or
about 4 September 1951.  Violation of Article 123, UCMJ, on  or  about
15 and 16 September 1951, with intent to  defraud,  falsely  made  the
signature of Richard J--- to certain writings and check in the amounts
of $5, $5, $5 and $25 respectively.  He plead not guilty  to  and  was
found guilty of all the specifications and charges and sentenced to be
dishonorably discharged, forfeiture of  all  pay  and  allowances  and
confined at hard labor for 3 years  (five  previous  convictions  were
considered).  The sentence was approved by the convening authority  on
1 April 1952.  On 11 September 1952, the Air Force Board of Review set
aside the findings of guilty  of  Charge  II  and  all  specifications
thereunder and affirmed the sentence as  modified  to  provide  for  a
dishonorable discharge, forfeiture  of  all  pay  and  allowances  and
confinement at hard labor for 1 year and 6 months.

On 17 September 1952, the applicant was dishonorably discharged  under
the provisions of AFR 39-18. He had completed a total of 4  years,  10
months and 6 days and was serving in the grade of airman basic at  the
time of discharge.

Pursuant to the Board's request, the Federal Bureau of  Investigation,
Clarksburg, WV, indicated that, on the basis of data  furnished,  they
are unable to locate an arrest record.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, stated
that the applicant was convicted at a general  court-martial  of  four
specifications of stealing a total of $35 from various  establishments
and individuals.  He was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge and one
year and 6 months’ confinement.  At the time of his discharge  he  had
444 days of lost time.  The applicant did not submit any new  evidence
or identify  any  errors  in  the  court-martial  proceedings  or  the
discharge processing that caused him an  injustice.   DPPRS  recommend
the applicant’s appeal for an upgrade of the discharge he received  47
years ago be denied (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that the $10
check, cashed by the bar owner, was nothing  more  than  a  promissory
note.  The check was sent  to  the  bank  by  mistake.   His  squadron
commander, who brought the charges  against  him,  was  aware  of  the
above.  He had the sergeant’s permission to cash “chit  books”  for  a
total of approximately $15.  He was never informed that he  was  going
to be court-martialed until he was told to report to the legal  office
on base.  At his court-martial hearing, he  stated  that  he  was  not
guilty of stealing the sergeant’s chit books and falsely obtaining the
$10 from the bar owner - all they had to do was ask the bar owner.   A
complete copy of the applicant’s response is appended at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was not  timely  filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice.  We  have  reviewed  the
court-martial proceedings and subsequent discharge and believe them to
be proper and  in  accordance  with  appropriate  directives  then  in
effect.  In addition, the Board took into  consideration  the  overall
nature of the applicant’s service in arriving at a  decision  to  deny
the requested action.  Although the applicant  provided  documentation
regarding his post-service activities, we find this information to  be
of limited scope and, in our view, it does not meet the criteria for a
favorable  recommendation  based  on  clemency  and  compassion.    We
therefore conclude that no basis exists to recommend favorable  action
on the applicant’s request.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  material  error  or  injustice;
that the application was denied without  a  personal  appearance;  and
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission  of
newly  discovered  relevant  evidence   not   considered   with   this
application.
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 4 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member
                  Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Oct 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 2 Nov 98.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 14 Dec 98.
   Exhibit E.  Letter from applicant, undated.




                                   TERRY A. YONKERS
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088676C070403

    Original file (2003088676C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This certificate shows the same information; the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 February 1950 and was discharged with an Bad Conduct Discharge on 10 June 1952 in the rank of Private. Army Regulation 615-364, then in effect, provided the policy for discharge of enlisted personnel pursuant only to approved sentences of a general court-martial empowered to impose a dishonorable discharge. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record, the Board found no cause for clemency and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1980-1989 | 8109128

    Original file (8109128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 September 1956, a member of Congress, who had submitted a request for reconsideration on the applicant’s behalf, was advised by the Executive Secretary of the Board that the regulations governing the Board’s operation provide that it could deny an application without a hearing if it determined that insufficient evidence had been presented to indicate probable material error or injustice; that, under such regulations, the Board had reconsidered the application and the information...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03458

    Original file (BC-2002-03458.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A special court-martial was convened on 4 June 1954 in Wilmington to address the applicant’s two outstanding AWOL charges, 1 December through 12 March 1954 and 23 through 29 March 1954, where the applicant was found guilty and consequently sentenced to confinement with hard labor for six months and fined $34 per month for six months. The sentence was disapproved and the charges dismissed as the HQ Eastern Defense Force commander found that the applicant had, in fact, been discharged from...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01447

    Original file (BC-2004-01447.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 October 1951, the applicant was tried and convicted by a special court-martial for failing to obey a lawful order. For this incident he was confined at hard labor for four (4) months, and forfeited $50.00 per month for a like period. In response to the Board’s request, the FBI indicated they were unable to identify with an arrest record pertaining to the applicant on the basis of information furnished (Exhibit D).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00762

    Original file (BC-2005-00762.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, and the discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 8 September 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Michael J. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00810

    Original file (BC-2004-00810.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00810 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: AMERICAN LEGION HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable or general discharge. Although the applicant’s adjudged sentence included a dishonorable discharge and total forfeitures, his punishment was mitigated with an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702478

    Original file (9702478.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-02478 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable or general. Applicant's request for a change to his discharge was denied by the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) on 12 August 1955. DPPRS stated that the records indicate the applicant’s military service was reviewed and appropriate action was taken.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00763

    Original file (BC-2009-00763.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 February 1954, the Air Force Board of Review approved the findings and sentence as adjudged. Specifically, Section 1552(f)(1) permits the correction of a record to reflect actions taken by reviewing authorities under the UCMJ. Furthermore, we do not find clemency is appropriate in this case since the applicant has failed to provide any evidence concerning his post-service activities.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02048

    Original file (BC-2005-02048.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant received one character and efficiency rating of “excellent,” dated 14 January 1952. 457522F), which is at Exhibit F. On 9 August 1955, the applicant submitted a similar application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFRDB) requesting his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. We conclude, therefore, that the discharge proceedings were proper and characterization of the discharge was appropriate to the existing circumstances.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201856

    Original file (0201856.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    From 25 July 1952 to 13 August 1952, he was charged with Absent Without Leave (AWOL). On 28 May 1954, the Air Force Discharge Review Board reviewed and denied applicant’s request that his discharge be upgraded. The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 15 July 2002, a letter was forwarded to applicant suggesting that the applicant consider providing evidence pertaining to his...