RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01994
COUNSEL:
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His bad conduct discharge be upgraded.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He desires a discharge that does not prevent him from getting a
weapons permit issued in his name. He believes his defense
counsel misrepresented him and was neglectful with information
that could have helped his case. Since his discharge from the
Air Force, he has lived his life within the boundaries of the law
and is now a registered security guard.
The applicant provides no supporting documentation.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28 September
1989.
The applicant was tried by a Special Court-Martial on 23 August
1996 and pled guilty to stealing military property, of a value of
over $4,000.00, in violation of Article 121, Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ). He was found guilty and the sentence
was adjudged on 23 August 1996. He was sentenced to a BCD,
confinement for 3 months, and a reduction to the grade of airman.
On 19 November 1998, the applicant was discharged with a BCD. He
served 8 years, 11 months and 6 days on active duty, with days of
lost time from 23 August 1996 through 6 November 1996.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLSA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states the applicants
sentence was within the legal limits and was an appropriate
punishment for the offenses committed. To overturn this
punishment now would require the Board to substitute its judgment
for that rendered by the court and the convening authority over
12 years ago when the facts and circumstances were fresh.
Granting clemency in this case would be unfair to those
individuals who honorably served their country while in uniform.
The applicant has provided no basis for granting clemency other
than his assertion that he has lived a life within the
boundaries of the law since his discharge. It would be
offensive to all those who served honorably to extend the same
service characterization and benefits to someone, such as the
applicant, who committed a crime while on active duty that
resulted in a punitive discharge.
After a review of the available records, clemency or other
administrative relief is not appropriate. Further, the
application is untimely. The alleged injustice, i.e.,
ineffective assistance of counsel, was clearly known to the
applicant and could have been identified not later than during
the appellate process. The applicant has provided no excuse or
reason for the delay.
The JAJM complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 10 December 2010, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit D). 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. After
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find no evidence
to show that the applicants discharge as a result of his
conviction by court-martial was erroneous or unjust. In view of
the foregoing, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of
the Military Justice Division and adopt the rationale expressed
as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to
sustain his burden of proof of the existence of either an error
or an injustice. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we
find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 BC-2010-01994 in Executive Session on 1 February 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-01994 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 May 2010.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, not dated.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 December 2010.
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00960
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00960 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His court-martial conviction be overturned, his rank and retirement be restored, and his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable. He did not live with his wife or provide support to her during the relevant time period. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01979
Therefore, the convening authority’s action, by which he approved the sentence except for the punitive discharge and the later action executing the bad conduct discharge after completion of appellate review were proper. JAJM notes after being sentenced to a bad conduct discharge, the applicant was reminded that the pretrial agreement had no effect on the adjudged bad conduct discharge (Exhibit E). _________________________________________________________________ The following members of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03090
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03090 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM states an application must be filed within three years after...
On 18 December 1987, the general court-martial approving authority approved only so much of the adjudged sentence which provided for a bad conduct discharge, 14 months of confinement, reduction to airman basic, and forfeiture of $438 per month for 14 months. On 23 February 1988, the Air Force Court of Military Review found the approved findings of guilty and the sentence to be correct in law and fact and, on the basis of the entire record, affirmed the 2 AFBCMR 96-02123 same. On 29...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00324
JAJM states the applicant is not contending that any specific actions have been taken by reviewing authorities that require correction of his record. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F. By letter dated 6 April 2006, the applicant’s Senator provided additional documentation from the applicant. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00673
Pursuant to the Board's request, the FBI, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM indicated that under 10 USC 1552(f), the AFBCMR’s ability to correct records related to courts-martial is limited. We do not believe an honorable discharge is warranted due to the limited documentation provided by the applicant regarding his activities since his...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00906
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00906 INDEX CODE: 123.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 SEP 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 24 days of confinement he served as the result of an Article 15 be removed from his records. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03289
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03289 INDEX CODE: A68.00 COUNSEL: GARY R. MYERS HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 Apr 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general. He was discharged on 15 Apr 88 with a BCD. Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit H. In another response, counsel...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00381
He pled and was found guilty, and was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge, confinement for 2 months, and reduction in grade to airman basic. The applicant was separated with a bad conduct discharge on 16 April 1999. The applicant’s bad conduct discharge had its basis in his trial and conviction by a general court- martial and he has provided no evidence showing that the sentence exceeded the maximum punishment allowable based on the offense of which he was convicted.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-00009
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00009 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be upgraded. It appears he is living a commendable life without further criminal conduct since his court martial. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of...