RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01711
            INDEX CODE:  110.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His BCD has made it difficult for him  to  become  a  productive  member  of
society.  It has made it difficult for him to find  a  job  and  he  doesn't
have the same benefits as others that served their country.  He admits  that
what he did was wrong and has apologized to everyone that  he  has  hurt  or
offended.  During this time in his  life  he  was  very  sick  and  thinking
irrationally.  He has found a job and has been working there for the past  4
years.  He is  able  to  use  his  G.I.  Bill  benefits  from  a  previously
honorable discharge to further his education but those  benefits  expire  in
2005.  He is constantly striving to do his best no matter what he does.   He
attends church every week and volunteers whenever he can be of service.   He
is a single father with two boys and is trying to better  himself  in  order
to provide them with the proper guidance and a good future.

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,
character  references,  his  educational   transcripts   and   certificates,
certificates  of  appreciation  and  training,   his   Honorable   Discharge
certificate, his birth certificate, a criminal background  check,  a  photo;
and a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from
Active Duty.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on
11 Mar 91 and was progressively promoted to  the  grade  of  senior  airman,
having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 11 Mar 94.

The applicant was tried by general  court-martial  for  a  specification  of
rape, housebreaking with intent to  commit  an  indecent  assault,  and  two
specifications of indecent assault.  He plead guilty  to  one  specification
of indecent assault and to unlawful entry as opposed to  housebreaking.   He
pled  not  guilty  to  the  specification  of   rape   and   the   remaining
specification of indecent assault.  He was found guilty of indecent  assault
by a military judge.  Officer members found  him  not  guilty  of  rape  but
guilty  of  one  specification  of  indecent  assault;  not  guilty  of  the
remaining indecent assault specification but guilty of  assault  consummated
by a battery; and guilty of housebreaking.  Sentence adjudged on 29  Mar  97
was a BCD, confinement  for  6  months,  3  months  of  hard  labor  without
confinement, and reduction to the grade of airman first class.   On  15  May
97, the convening authority reduced the hard labor without confinement to  1
month but otherwise approved  the  sentence.   The  case  was  reviewed  and
affirmed by the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA)  on  15 Oct  98.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces,  affirmed  the  decision  of
the AFCCA on 31 Aug 00.  The applicant was  discharged  on  12  Apr  98,  he
served 7 years, 1 month, and 1 day on active duty.

The following is a resume of the  applicant's  Enlisted  Performance  Report
profile:

      PERIOD ENDING    PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

            11 Oct 96        3
            11 Oct 95        4
            06 May 95        5
            15 Sep 94        5
            15 Sep 93        5
            13 Nov 92        3

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM recommends denial of the applicant's request.  JAJM  states  that
rape, indecent assault, and housebreaking are serious offenses.  As such,  a
general court-martial was the appropriate  forum.   The  sentence  was  well
within the legal limits and the BCD was an appropriate  punishment  for  the
offenses alleged.  While clemency is an option, there is no reason  for  the
Board to exercise clemency in  this  case.   The  applicant  did  not  serve
honorably.  The applicant helped an airman move  into  her  apartment  where
she later woke up to find the applicant on top of her.  A few  weeks  later,
while at work he came up behind the  same  airman  in  a  storage  room  and
fondled her.  A few months later he entered another airman's room while  she
was asleep and fondled her.  He was caught and convicted  of  these  crimes.
There are consequences for criminal behavior.  The authorities involved  all
believed  that  a  BCD  was  an  appropriate  consequence  that   accurately
characterized his military service and  his  crimes.   He  has  provided  no
evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the sentence.    The  JAJM
evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22  Nov
02 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  While we  find  his  post-service
accomplishments commendable, we are not persuaded by the evidence  submitted
in support of his appeal, that a change to his characterization  of  service
is warranted.  The comments of the Office of the Judge Advocate General  are
supported by the evidence of record.  We find no evidence of error  in  this
case and after thoroughly reviewing evidence of record, we  do  not  believe
he has suffered from  an  injustice.   Therefore,  based  on  the  available
evidence of record, we find no basis upon which to favorably  consider  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  Docket  Number  02-01711  in
Executive Session on 15 Jan 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
      Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jul 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 31 Oct 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Nov 02.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair