Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03050
Original file (BC-2002-03050.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS



IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03050
            INDEX CODE:  110.02, 106.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His dishonorable discharge be changed to a bad conduct discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The offense he was found guilty  of  was  not  dishonorable.   He  did
nothing to dishonor the  United  States.   What  he  did  was  stupid,
immoral and illegal.  The dishonorable discharge continues  to  punish
him on a daily basis and prevents him  from  applying  for  jobs  that
require a security clearance.  The applicant states that changing  his
discharge would not exonerate him but will  make  the  discharge  more
readily fit the crime.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement,  a
copy of his Bachelor of Science Certificate and a copy of his  resume.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
9 July 1976.

In January 1988, the applicant was charged  with  committing  indecent
acts upon and taking indecent liberties with three girls under age 16,
soliciting intercourse and sodomy with one of the girls and soliciting
and indecent act with another  of  the  girls,  all  in  violation  of
Article 134, UCMJ.  He pled guilty to committing  indecent  acts  upon
and taking indecent liberties with one girl  and  not  guilty  to  all
other specifications of  the  charge.   He  elected  to  be  tried  by
military judge alone.  The military  judge  found  the  applicant  not
guilty of committing an indecent act on the third girl, but guilty  of
all other specifications of the charge.  On 21 January  1988,  he  was
sentenced to a dishonorable  discharge,  confinement  for  30  months,
forfeit of $400 per month for 30 months, and reduced to the  grade  of
airman basic.  On 28 March 1988, the convening authority approved  the
sentence as adjudged.

Because his sentence included a  dishonorable  discharge,  the  United
States Air Force Court of Military  Review  reviewed  the  applicant’s
convictions.  On 4 August 1988, the U.S.  Court  of  Military  Appeals
denied the applicant’s petition for review.  He was discharged  on  28
September 1988.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM  recommends  denial.   The  applicant’s   contentions   are
untimely, without merit and constitute neither error nor injustice and
they  recommend  the  Board  deny  the  applicant  relief.   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
31 Jan 03, 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  an  error  or  injustice  to  warrant  changing  his
discharge.  After careful consideration of the available evidence,  we
found no indication that the actions taken  to  effect  his  discharge
were  improper  or  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the   governing
regulations in effect at the time, or that the actions  taken  against
the applicant were based on factors other than his own misconduct.  It
is  our  opinion,  that  the  dishonorable  discharge   he   received,
accurately characterizes his military service.   Therefore,  we  agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary
responsibility  and  adopt  their  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or
injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive  evidence  to  the
contrary, 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 Docket  Number  BC-2002-
03050 in Executive Session on 9 April 2003, under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Martha Maust, Member
                 Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 02 w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 14 Jan 03.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Jan 03.





      MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03050

    Original file (BC-2002-03050.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that changing his discharge would not exonerate him but will make the discharge more readily fit the crime. The applicant’s contentions are untimely, without merit and constitute neither error nor injustice and they recommend the Board deny the applicant relief. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02085

    Original file (BC-2003-02085.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The court affirmed his conviction and sentence on 18 April 1994. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM reviewed the case and recommended denial. AFLSA/JAJMA complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that while he was in Japan he did seek mental health help from the doctor at the mental health clinic in Misawa.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03700

    Original file (BC-2004-03700.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03700 INDEX CODE: 105.01, 106.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 7 Jun 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1994 dishonorable discharge be upgraded to general. The applicant and his family underwent family counseling for marital difficulties and behavioral problems with the stepmother...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01711

    Original file (BC-2002-01711.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged on 12 Apr 98, he served 7 years, 1 month, and 1 day on active duty. The authorities involved all believed that a BCD was an appropriate consequence that accurately characterized his military service and his crimes. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02837

    Original file (BC-2002-02837.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    His dishonorable discharge be upgraded to honorable. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant's appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03796

    Original file (BC-2002-03796.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 Mar 01, the Board considered and denied an application pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that his dishonorable discharge be upgraded and his court-martial conviction be set aside (Exhibit C). On 12 Jul 96, the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA) considered whether the assault specifications were “multiplicious” with the unpremeditated murder charge. A complete copy of the AFLSA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02934

    Original file (BC-2003-02934.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 3 July 1957, the applicant was dishonorably discharged. On 20 October 1960, he was found guilty by civil court and sentenced to 18 months of confinement. The JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation and the FBI report were forwarded to the applicant on 19 December 2003 (Exhibit D) and 4 February 2004 (Exhibit E) for review and comment.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02292

    Original file (BC-2003-02292.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02292 INDEX CODE: 131.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6). During his court-martial, the applicant offered mitigating circumstances in his defense including his excellent service record, statements...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00246

    Original file (BC-2006-00246.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00246 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 JUL 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. On 24 Dec 03, applicant was discharged pursuant to the General Court-Martial Order, with a bad conduct discharge. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00167

    Original file (BC-2003-00167.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00167 INDEX CODE: 106.00, 110.02 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 28 July 1988, the Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence as approved by the convening...