Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03860
Original file (BC-2011-03860.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03860 

COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Based on his successful service record with AmeriCorps and his 
personal growth since the time of his discharge, he feels his 
characterization of discharge should be upgraded based on 
clemency. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
AmeriCorps service records, character references, and post-
service accomplishments. 

 

A copy of the applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, 
is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 2 April 1990, the applicant, then an airman first class (E-2), 
was tried by special court-martial for one specification of 
wrongful use of marijuana and one specification of wrongful use 
of cocaine in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military 
Justice (UCMJ). The Government withdrew the specification 
concerning the wrongful use of marijuana and pursuant to a 
pretrial agreement, the applicant pled guilty to the wrongful use 
of cocaine. Before a military judge, the applicant was found 
guilty in accordance with his plea. He was sentenced to a BCD, 
confinement for ten months, forfeiture of $300 pay per month for 
six months, and reduction to the grade of airman basic (E-1). On 
14 June 1990, the convening authority approved only so much of 
the sentence as provided for a BCD, eight months confinement, 
forfeiture of $300 pay per month for six months, and reduction to 
airman basic. On 3 August 1990, the Air Force Court of Military 
Review affirmed the findings and sentence. The applicant 
declined to petition the United States Court of Military Appeals 
for review of his conviction, making the findings and sentence in 
his case final and conclusive under the UCMJ. As a result, the 
applicant’s discharge was ordered to be executed on 5 February 
1991. 


 

The applicant was discharged effective 5 February 1991 with a BCD 
and a narrative reason for separation of “Conviction by Court-
Martial (Other than Desertion).” He served 3 years, 6 months, 
and 22 days on active duty with lost time from 2 April 1990 
through 19 October 1990. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states the applicant offers 
no allegation of error or injustice. He simply requests his BCD 
be upgraded due to his personal growth and self improvement over 
the last twenty years. The record of trial shows no error in the 
processing of the court-martial. Both the adjudged and the 
approved sentences were below the maximum possible sentence of a 
dishonorable discharge, confinement for five years, total 
forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to the grade 
of airman basic. His sentence to a BCD, eight months 
confinement, forfeiture of $300 pay per month for six months, and 
reduction to airman basic was well within the legal limits and 
was appropriate punishment for the offense committed. 

 

It is JAJM’s opinion that clemency in this case would be unfair 
to those individuals who honorably served their country while in 
uniform. It addition, it would be offensive to those who served 
honorably to extend the same benefits to someone who committed 
crimes such as the applicant’s while on active duty. 

 

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 10 February 2012, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E). 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. 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 our conclusion that the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
Furthermore, we do not find clemency is appropriate in this case 
since the applicant has not provided any evidence concerning his 
post-service activities. Therefore, the applicant’s request is 
not favorably considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-03860 in Executive Session on 8 May 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-03860 was considered: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. FBI Report. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 6 Dec 11. 

Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 12. 

Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Feb 12, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01478

    Original file (BC-2010-01478.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: During his time in the service he performed his duties in an exceptional manner. The mere fact that the applicant continues to accept responsibility for his actions does not erase his past criminal conduct, does not make his BCD any less appropriate for the offenses he committed and certainly does not weigh in favor of Board action now to undo that part of the punishment. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02290

    Original file (BC-2012-02290.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 10 January 1990, the United States Air Force Court of Military Review affirmed the applicant’s court-martial conviction. 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 our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02021

    Original file (BC-2011-02021.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His official records be corrected to update his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) to General (Under Honorable Conditions). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. We find no evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02295

    Original file (BC-2008-02295.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02295 INDEX CODE: 110.02 xxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the applicant's submission, we do not believe he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02287

    Original file (BC 2013 02287.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02287 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). On 8 June 1994, the AFCMR reversed the applicant’s convictions for rape and harassment, but affirmed the finding of guilty on the threat and wrongful use...

  • 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 | CY2011 | BC-2010-04506

    Original file (BC-2010-04506.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS However, while convening authority subsequently approved the findings of guilty with regard to the violations of Article 134, the finding of guilty for the charge and second specification of the Article 113 violation was not approved and approved only so much of the sentence as provided for the BCD, six months of confinement, forfeiture of $249.00 pay per month for six months and a reduction to the grade of airman basic. There is no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02677

    Original file (BC-2011-02677.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02677 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. On 13 Sep 94, the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence in the applicant's case. We find no evidence that indicates the applicant’s service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01754

    Original file (BC-2010-01754.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The sanity board found that, at the time of the alleged offenses, the applicant did suffer from severe mental disorders, but was able to appreciate the nature and wrongfulness of his conduct. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 4 Feb 11 for review and comment within 30 days. We...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03447

    Original file (BC-2012-03447.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03447 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. Based on the documents provided by the applicant and the limited information in the Air Force Automated Military Justice Analysis and Management System (AMJAMS), there is no apparent error or injustice in...