Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04070
Original file (BC-2012-04070.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04070 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under 
honorable conditions) or an honorable discharge. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He believes his discharge was unjust. The punishment he received 
during his special court-martial outweighs the crime. He further 
states that other veterans in his situation have received an 
upgrade of their character of service. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 May 1970. 

 

The applicant was tried and convicted by a special court-martial 
for wrongfully transferring marijuana on two separate dates. He 
pled guilty and was sentenced to a BCD and a reduction in grade 
from technical sergeant to senior airman. The sentence was 
adjudged on 20 July 1982. 

 

On 23 March 1983, the applicant was discharged in the grade of 
sergeant with a BCD under the provisions of Special Court-Martial 
Order Number 1. He served 13 years, 10 months and 4 days on 
active duty. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states the applicant does not 
allege an error or injustice, rather he believes the discharge 
should be upgraded due to the amount of time that has passed 
since his misconduct. The record of trial does not show an error 
in the processing of the special court-martial. At trial, the 
applicant pled guilty to the charge and specifications. The 
applicant who was represented by military counsel had the 


opportunity to demand the government prove the offenses against 
him. Prior to accepting his guilty plea, as evidenced by the 
record of trial, the military judge ensured the applicant 
understood the meaning and effect of his plea and the maximum 
punishment that could be imposed if his guilty plea was accepted 
by the court. The military judge explained the elements and 
definitions of the offenses to which the applicant pled guilty, 
and the applicant explained in his own words why he believed he 
was guilty. The court received evidence in aggravation, as well 
as in extenuation and mitigation, prior to crafting an 
appropriate sentence for the crimes committed. The applicant 
made an unsworn statement on his behalf asking for leniency so he 
could take care of his family. The court-martial took all of 
these factors into consideration when imposing the applicant’s 
sentence. 

 

A BCD is more than merely a service characterization; it is a 
punishment for the crimes the applicant committed while a member 
of the armed forces. A BCD was and continues to be part of a 
proper sentence and properly characterizes his service. 

 

Clemency in this case would be unfair to those individuals who 
honorably served their country while in uniform. Upgrading the 
applicant’s discharge is not appropriate. 

 

The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 10 December 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days 
(Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 note this 
Board is without authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise 
expunge a court-martial conviction. Rather, in accordance with 
Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552(f), our actions are 
limited to corrections to the record to reflect actions taken by 
the reviewing officials and action on the sentence of the court-


martial for the purpose of clemency. We find no evidence which 
indicates the applicant’s service characterization, which had its 
basis in his court-martial conviction 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 Justice 
(UCMJ). We have considered the applicant's overall quality of 
service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the 
discharge, the seriousness of the offense to which convicted, and 
the absence of any documentation pertaining to post-service 
activities. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude 
that clemency is warranted. In view of the above, we cannot 
recommend approval based on the current evidence of record. 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2012-04070 in Executive Session on 16 May 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04070 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 September 2012. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 27 November 2012. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 December 2012. 

 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01524

    Original file (BC-2012-01524.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01524 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _____________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a Under Other Than Honorable Condition (UOTHC) discharge. At the special court- martial and before a panel of officer members, consistent with his pleas, the applicant was found guilty of all three...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04547

    Original file (BC-2012-04547.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04547 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. It also indicates that a bad conduct discharge is more than merely a service characterization; it is a punishment for the crimes the individual committed while a member of the...

  • 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-2011-02285

    Original file (BC-2011-02285.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFLOA/JAJM complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial noting the statements by the applicant's psychiatrist and her recent diagnosis of Bipolar Disorder is insufficient to justify a medical basis for discharge. The Medical Consultant’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the AFBCMR Medical Consultant evaluation and Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 02269

    Original file (BC 2012 02269.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02269 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general. Specifically, section 1552(f)(1) permits the correction of a record to reflect actions taken by a reviewing authority under the UCMJ. We note this Board is without authority to reverse, set...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01729

    Original file (BC-2012-01729.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 7 October 1999, he petitioned for a grant of review before the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces; however, his request was denied, making the findings and sentence final and conclusive under the UCMJ. He simply requests his BCD be upgraded because he is a productive member of his community, the punishment was severe, and otherwise he served his country honorably. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01634

    Original file (BC-2012-01634.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    As noted by the military judge during his court-martial, he unknowingly downloaded the files, but afterwards did not take the due diligence to delete the illegal files. We note that this Board is without authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a court-martial conviction. We considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, in view of the applicant’s overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge and the limited...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00736

    Original file (BC-2012-00736.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    We find no evidence which indicates 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 Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2012-00736 in Executive Session on 4 Oct 12, under...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02018

    Original file (BC 2013 02018.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 Aug 85, the applicant was furnished a BCD with a narrative reason for separation of “conviction by court-martial (desertion).” On 8 May 87, the Air Force Discharge Review Board considered the applicant’s appeal to upgrade is discharge to General and denied his request, finding neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiated an inequity or impropriety which would justify a change of the discharge. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05280

    Original file (BC-2012-05280.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    At his court-martial, the applicant pled guilty to all charges and specifications. We have considered the applicant's overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted, and the absence of any documentation pertaining to his post-service activities. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted.