RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02186
INDEX CODE: 110.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reinstated in the Air Force Reserve.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He received deferred adjudication rather than a civil conviction for
the alleged sexual assault on a child. Thus, he believes he was
unfairly discharged from the Air Force Reserve.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided an expanded
statement, a personal statement, and documentation pertaining his
deferred adjudication and probation.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Available documentation indicated that the applicant enlisted in the
Regular Air Force on 1989 for a period of four years. He was released
from active duty on 14 Aug 92 and transferred to the Air Force
Reserve.
On 10 Jan 99, the applicant reenlisted in the Air Force Reserve for a
period of six years, in the grade of technical sergeant.
On 5 Feb 00, the applicant’s commander recommended that the applicant
be separated with an honorable discharge based on a civilian
conviction for aggravated sexual assault on a child.
On 27 Mar 00, the Chief of Military Personnel Operations sent a Letter
of Notification of Initiation of Separation Action to the applicant.
Specifically, the Statement of Reasons alleged that on or about 17 Aug
95, the applicant had been convicted of aggravated sexual assault of a
child by the 226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas.
The applicant acknowledged receipt and requested a discharge board.
On 18 Jul 00, a Board of Officers was convened. The board found by a
preponderance of the evidence that the applicant was convicted of
aggravated sexual assault of a child on or about 17 Aug 95 by the
226th Judicial District Court of Bexar County, Texas. Consistent with
the findings, the board recommended that the applicant be discharged
from the Air Force Reserve and issued an honorable discharge
certificate.
On 17 Aug 00, the Director of Military Law found the discharge board
proceedings to be legally sufficient and recommended that the
applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge.
On 18 Oct 00, the discharge authority approved the discharge action
and directed that the applicant be discharged with an honorable
discharge.
The applicant was discharged from the Air Force Reserve under the
provisions of AFI 36-3209 (Misconduct – Civilian Conviction),
effective 2 Nov 00, and furnished an honorable discharge.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFRC/DPM recommended denial noting that AFRC/JA had reviewed the
applicant’s request and did not find any evidence of injustice to
warrant setting aside the administrative discharge board’s findings
and recommendations. They indicated that they concur with AFRC/JA.
A complete copy of the AFRC/DPM evaluation, with attachments,
including AFRC/JA’s legal review, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 11
Oct 02 for review and response. As of this date, no response has been
received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. The evidence of record reflects
that the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve
based on his civilian conviction in Texas for aggravated sexual
assault of a child; i.e., his stepdaughter. He now requests
reinstatement contending that he received deferred adjudication rather
than a civil conviction. Thus, he believes he was unfairly
discharged. While it does appear that was the case, we note that
Texas Statutes and Codes, Section 86.006, defines a “convicted person”
as one who has received, among other things, a fine, probation, or
deferred adjudication. Therefore, in the absence of evidence which
shows that the applicant's substantial rights were violated, that the
information used as a basis for his discharge was erroneous, or that
his superiors abused their discretionary authority, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
02186 in Executive Session on 19 Nov 02, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member
Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Jul 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/DPM, dated 18 Sep 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Oct 02.
OLGA M. CRERAR
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03920
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/DPM recommended denial noting the applicant was in a retraining status at the time of her promotion to TSgt and did not have a three- skill level in the promotion AFSC as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. AFRC/DPM indicated that as a result of the applicant’s DOR being changed to 1 Mar 02, she did not meet the two- year minimum time in grade requirement for promotion to the grade...
AFBCMR 01-02560 INDEX CODE: 135.03 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying Memorandum for the Chief...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03263
The applicant began her IADT tour on 8 Nov 02 and completed the 8 months TIG requirement on 8 Jul 03, rendering her eligible for promotion to E-4 during the next (1 Sep 03) promotion cycle. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00132 INDEX CODE: 108.01, 110.02, 122.01 COUNSEL: Mr. MICHAEL J. CALABRO HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Not In Line of Duty (NLOD) determination be removed from his records; all documents and references pertaining to the NLOD determination be removed from his records; his request for transfer to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00933
She was considered by the FY02 JAG and Chaplain Major Selection Board (V0402B), which convened on 19 Feb 01, and the FY03 JAG and Chaplain Other than Selected Reserve Board (W0403B), which convened on 22 Apr 02, but not selected for promotion by either board. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1997-02957A
A complete copy of the HQ AFRC/DPM cover letter, with attachments, is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Complete copies of the evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 22 Nov 02 for review and response within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence...
On 2 Feb 91, he enlisted in the Washington Air National Guard (ANG); he transferred to the Air Force Reserve on 10 Dec 92. On 19 Feb 95, he was discharged from the Air Force Reserve with a General discharge by reason of Defective Enlistment – Fraudulent Entry. On 5 Jul 94, HQ AFRES/CV approved the findings and recommendations and the case file was forwarded to the Air Force Personnel Board (AFPB) for a determination as to whether the applicant should receive Lengthy Service Probation (LSP).
A complete copy of the HQ AFRC/DPM letter, with attachment, is at Exhibit M. A copy of the HQ AFRC/DPM letter, with attachment, was forwarded to the applicant’s counsel on 23 September 1999 for review and comment within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: Inasmuch as the applicant has been afforded due process through a new, appropriately conducted new PDRB, and that this PDRB’s findings with respect to his medical condition...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02121 INDEX CODE: 135.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect one (1) additional point to cover a “manday” for the time he spent at the USAF Academy Hospital, taking an Air Force Reserve mandated Cardiolite test. Accordingly, a majority of the Board recommends...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00419 INDEX CODE 110.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated into the Air Force Reserve. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are...