RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02737
INDEX CODE: 110.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 MARCH 2008
______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During the course of her imprisonment, she completed all the Air Force
requirements to include serving her prison and parole time. She now wants
to use the GI Bill to attend school and better herself to make a better
life for her and her family.
Her complete submission is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 December 1988. In 1990,
the applicant was charged with violation of Article 107, making an official
false statement; Article 123, Forgery; and Article 134, uttering worthless
checks. The specific reasons were on 5 April 1990, with the intent to
defraud, she falsely altered a check by adding her name thereto as a payee;
on 29 April 1990, with intent to defraud, she falsely signed a $65.00
check; on 30 April 1990, with the intent to defraud, she falsely signed
three Master Card receipts totaling $109.15; on or about 6 through 21 June
1990, she made and uttered checks totaling $1050.20. On 18 September 1990,
she was court martialed and found guilty on all charges. She was sentenced
to a bad conduct discharge, confinement for one year and ordered to
forfeiture of $400.00 pay per month for one year and reduction to airman
basic. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged and the
Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and the sentences
as appropriate. On 12 April 1993, she was discharged from the Air Force in
the grade of airman basic with a BCD. She was assigned RE code “2M” which
denotes “conviction by court-martial (other than desertion)”.
She served 3 years, 4 months and 15 days on active duty.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states the applicant provides no
support for her contentions. She signed a pretrial Agreement (PTA)
acknowledging the convening authority could approve a BCD if it were
adjudged. In addition, the application was not filed within three years
and the application is without merit. The applicant is not contending that
any specific actions have been taken by the reviewing authority that
require correction of her record, as a result, any decision regarding her
discharge status must be done as a matter of clemency. There is no
allegation of impropriety in the manner in which the court-martial was
conducted, and the applicant was afforded all due process and appellate
rights. She chose to plead guilty to each specification to obtain the
benefit of sentence limitation, knowing full well that a BCD was a possible
punishment. Giving the sentence she received, there is no evidence of a
clear error or injustice related to the sentence, specifically the punitive
discharge. Therefore, there is no reason required by law to grant the
relief the applicant is requesting.
The complete 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 8
December 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response (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 an error or injustice. After careful consideration of the
available evidence, we found no indication that the actions taken to affect
her discharge and characterization of her service were improper, contrary
to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time, or
based on factors other than her own misconduct. We considered upgrading
her discharge based on clemency. However, the applicant has not provided
sufficient information pertaining to her post-service activities and
accomplishments for us to conclude that she has overcome the behavioral
traits which caused the discharge. Therefore, based on the available
evidence of record, we find no compelling 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 BC-2006-02737 in Executive
Session on 23 January 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Ms. Judith B. Oliva, Member
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Spetember, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. AFLOA/JAJM Letter, dated 21 November 2006.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 December 2006.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02720
Instead he makes a broad assertion that because no member detailed to his court-martial was African-American, the convening authority improperly excluded African- Americans from consideration as members. Clearly, given the overwhelming evidence adduced at trial (including video of the applicant in the bank making a fraudulent transaction) and the applicant’s post-trial admission of guilt, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the absence of African-American court members was...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03750
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03750 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 JUL 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His dishonorable discharge be upgraded and the felony conviction he received at a court-martial in 1994 be removed. Specifically, section 15552(f)(1)...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00960
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00960 INDEX CODE: A68.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Applicant’s request is not clear; however, it appears she is requesting that her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded and/or be changed to a medical discharge or retirement. She was convicted of the remaining specifications, but...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-02737
________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 September 2006, the applicant submitted an appeal to the Board requesting her BCD be upgraded to a general discharge. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 12 April 1993, she was discharged with service characterized as general (under...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01739
He receive a Presidential pardon removing his court-martial conviction and bad conduct discharge (BCD) from his record. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. As such, applicant's request for a Presidential pardon is not possible since such action is not within the purview of this Board's authority.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05158
He simply requests an upgrade to his BCD based on the circumstances at the time he was court-martialed along with the positive progress he has made since his discharge. As of this date, this office has not received a response. We find no evidence which indicates the applicants service characterization, which had its basis in his court-martial and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the Uniform Code of Military...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01053
The JAJM complete submission 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 July 2009 for review and comment within 30 days. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicants discharge should be upgraded to a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01053
The JAJM complete submission 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 July 2009 for review and comment within 30 days. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicants discharge should be upgraded to a general discharge. _________________________________________________________________ The...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03705
DFAS-IN states the applicant was discharged from the service due to a General Court-Martial Order, dated 18 July 2007. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The DFAS letter has errors and incorrect information. Based on the evidence of record and in an attempt to guide the applicant to the proper office for resolution, we determined the applicant is correct in that,...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01267
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS We also find no evidence to indicate the applicant’s service characterization, which had its basis in his conviction by General Court-Martial and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the UCMJ. We have considered applicant's overall quality of service, the General Court-Martial conviction that precipitated the discharge, and the seriousness of the offenses of which...