Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00160
Original file (BC-2009-00160.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-00160
            INDEX CODE:  110.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded based on clemency.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like to be considered for better jobs  and  housing.   Clemency  is
warranted in his case as it is an injustice for him  to  continue  suffering
the adverse consequences of a BCD.  Twenty-five years is a long time and  he
is still being punished.

In support of  the  application,  the  applicant  submits  a  DD  Form  293,
Application for the Review of Discharge from the Armed Forces of the  United
States and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from  Active
Duty.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 Feb 82.  On 17 Jun 83,  the
applicant was tried by special court-martial.  Between Oct and  Nov  82,  he
sold marijuana and valium to another airman who was  an  informant  for  the
Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI).  Based on  those  sales,
he was  charged  with  three  specifications  of  wrongful  distribution  of
diazepam, in violation of Article 134,  Uniform  Code  of  Military  Justice
(UCMJ).  He pled not  guilty  to  the  charge  and  its  specifications  and
requested to be tried by military judge alone.  He was found guilty  of  all
specifications and sentenced to a  bad  conduct  discharge,  confinement  at
hard labor for six months and forfeiture of $250 per month for  six  months.
On 24 Aug 83, the convening authority approved  the  sentence  as  adjudged.
On 25 Jan 84, the Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed  the  findings
and sentence.  The applicant petitioned the United States Court of  Military
Appeals for review of his conviction but his request was  denied  on  6  Sep
84, making the findings and sentence in his case final and conclusive  under
the UCMJ.  His discharge was executed on 30 Jan 85.  He served  2  years,  6
months and 25 days on active  duty  with  152  days  of  lost  time  due  to
confinement.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted  from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the  letter  prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial.

Applicants must file for correction of military records within  three  years
after an error or injustice is discovered.   The  applicant’s  court-martial
occurred in 1983; therefore, the application is untimely.  In addition,  the
Board is without authority to reverse, set aside,  or  otherwise  expunge  a
court-martial conviction that occurred on or after 5 May 50 (effective  date
of the UCMJ).

While clemency may be granted, the applicant  offers  no  justification  for
his request nor has he submitted any basis for an upgrade of his  discharge.
 Rules for Courts-Martial states that a bad conduct discharge  “is  designed
as punishment for bad-conduct  rather  than  as  a  punishment  for  serious
offenses of either a civilian or military nature.”  A bad conduct  discharge
is more than merely a service characterization, but it is also a  punishment
for crimes committed while a member of the armed  forces.   The  applicant’s
sentence was well within the legal limits and was an appropriate  punishment
for the offenses committed.

The mere fact that 25 years have passed since  his  court-martial,  or  that
the BCD may have caused  difficulties  for  him  does  not  erase  his  past
criminal conduct or render the punitive discharge any less  appropriate  for
the offenses.

JAJM opines clemency in this case would be unfair to those  individuals  who
honorably served their country while in uniform and offensive to extend  the
same benefits and privileges  to  someone  guilty  of  distributing  illegal
drugs to other service members.

The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on  3  Apr
09 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 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  error  or  injustice.   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 its rationale as the basis for the conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   Therefore,
in the absence of 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 this application in  Executive
Session on 18 August 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
      Mr. Dick Anderegg, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2009-00160:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Mar 09, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 18 Mar 09.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Apr 09.




                                   MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01955

    Original file (BC-2009-01955.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has identified no error or injustice related to her prosecution or the sentence, but says there is injustice in the fact that she received the bad conduct discharge in light of her otherwise clean, eight-year military record. As noted by AFLOA/JAJM, actions by this Board related to courts-martial are limited to corrections on the sentence for the purpose of clemency or to correct the record to reflect actions taken by reviewing authorities under the Uniform Code of Military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01049

    Original file (BC-2009-01049.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s certificates of accomplishment provide scant support for action by the Board in light of the seriousness of the offenses he committed. We find no evidence which indicates the applicant’s BCD, which had its basis in his conviction by a 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. However, because of the limited documentation concerning his activities since leaving...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01049

    Original file (BC 2009 01049.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s certificates of accomplishment provide scant support for action by the Board in light of the seriousness of the offenses he committed. We find no evidence which indicates the applicant’s BCD, which had its basis in his conviction by a 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. However, because of the limited documentation concerning his activities since leaving...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00415

    Original file (BC-2009-00415.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 Feb 83, the Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and approved the sentence as adjudged, although it reassessed the sentence and found appropriate only so much of the sentence that extended to a BCD, confinement for two months, forfeiture of $125.00 pay per month for four months and reduction to the grade of E-1. The complete AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2005-02137

    Original file (BC-2005-02137.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 Aug 07, counsel filed an addendum, with additional documents, to the applicant’s 5 Jun 05 request for relief to the Board (Exhibit C). The appellate courts found his conviction and sentence correct in fact and law. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03210

    Original file (BC-2007-03210.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03210 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His dishonorable discharge be upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation provided an Investigative Report which is attached at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00253

    Original file (BC-2008-00253.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    JAJM states the applicant submitted a request for clemency to the convening authority. The Air Force Board of Review found the findings and sentencing to be correct in law and fact. 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04288

    Original file (BC-2008-04288.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04288 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has been an upstanding citizen since his discharge from the Air Force, and he requests...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-03852

    Original file (BC-2009-03852.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She pled not guilty to the charge and specifications; however, a panel of officers and enlisted personnel found her guilty of the charge and all specifications except the specification of wrongful transfer of cocaine. One of the witnesses testified that he and the applicant used marijuana together five to ten times during one three month period. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00509

    Original file (BC-2006-00509.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPRS complete 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 17 Mar 06 for review and comment within 30 days and on 17 Apr 2006, he was forwarded a copy of the FBI report. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Feb...