Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05283
Original file (BC 2012 05283.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05283

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His dishonorable discharge be upgraded based on clemency.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unable to adapt to military life.  He went absent without 
leave (AWOL) due to the mental and emotional stress of broken 
promises for a discharge by his superiors.  He was court 
martialed and subsequently discharged.  His record prior to the 
court-martials was impeccable with no character issues or 
derogatory remarks.  He never intended to dishonor his country.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 Feb 53, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force.

The applicant was tried and convicted by a special court-martial 
for being absent without proper authority from 19 Apr 54 through 
12 Sep 54.  He was sentenced to a bad conduct discharge (BCD), 
forfeiture of $55.00 per month for six months, and confinement 
for six months.  

While serving his sentence of the special court-martial, the 
applicant was tried and convicted by general court-martial for 
being absent without leave (AWOL) from 21 Dec 54 through 
13 Feb 55.  He was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge (DD), 
forfeiture of all pay and allowances and confinement one year.

The applicant was again tried and convicted by general court-
martial for being AWOL from 20 Aug 55 through 6 Jan 56.  He was 
sentenced to a DD, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and 
confinement for six months.

On 28 Mar 56, the applicant was furnished a DD.  He was credited 
with 1 year, 1 month, and 21 days of total active service.  
On 18 Jun 13, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days 
(Exhibit C).  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 an error or injustice.  We note 
that 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), 
actions by this Board 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, and 
the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted.  However, in 
the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s post-
service activities, we are not inclined to upgrade the 
applicant’s discharge on that basis.  Therefore, in view of the 
above, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this 
application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material 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-2012-05283 in Executive Session on 29 Aug 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Nov 12.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 13, w/atch.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00278

    Original file (BC-2004-00278.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, in view of the repeated misconduct during his short period of service that resulted in his court-martial actions and subsequent discharge and the contents of the FBI Report of Investigation, we are not persuaded that an upgrade of the characterization of the applicant’s service on the basis of clemency is warranted. Therefore, based on the available evidence of record, the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge is not favorably considered. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00146

    Original file (BC-2003-00146.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant submits personal statements and copies of her father’s DD Form 214 and Statement of Service. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). After considering the evidence and testimony, the Board of Officers determined that the former member should be discharged with an undesirable discharge because of unfitness.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03596

    Original file (BC-2002-03596.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 23 June 1957, he was honorably discharged and on 24 June 1957, reenlisted in the RegAF for a period of four years. In an application, dated 13 August 1972, he requested his discharge be upgraded to one under honorable conditions. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that at the time of his discharge on 13 August 1959, he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00866

    Original file (BC-2004-00866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 Aug 56, the squadron commander initiated discharge action, with a general characterization, against the applicant based on his regression of performance. On 28 Jan 65, the applicant filed an appeal for an upgraded discharge with the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200518

    Original file (0200518.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He pled not guilty to the specification and charge; however, he was found guilty and sentenced to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of $50.00 per month for 12 months and confinement at hard labor for 12 months. The applicant’s subsequent requests for reconsideration of his application were denied by the Board on 10 Apr 02 and 13 Jun 02 respectively (Exhibit C). Exhibit A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900471

    Original file (9900471.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 Feb 57, the applicant was discharged from the Air Force in the grade of airman basic under the provisions of AFR 39-17 (Unfitness) with an undesirable discharge. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Management Specialist, AFPC/DPPRS, reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant did not identify any specific errors in the discharge proceedings nor provide facts warranting an upgrade of the discharge he received. Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00132

    Original file (BC-2005-00132.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 10 Feb 05, SAF/MRBR advised the applicant that, upon receiving his application, they researched the index of military personnel records stored at NPRC. Pursuant to a 3 Mar 05 request by the AFBCMR Staff, AFLSA/JAJM provided a copy of the applicant’s Record of Trial (ROT) and associated documents, including a legal review. The Board of Review did not recommend clemency and, on 24 Aug 56, the sentence was affirmed.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01494

    Original file (BC-2003-01494.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01494 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 21 Oct 88, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and denied applicant’s request to have his discharge upgraded. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01912

    Original file (BC-2005-01912.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His record has been good since leaving the Air Force and he has no arrests. The complete Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 10 Aug 05, the AFBCMR staff offered the applicant an opportunity to provide information pertaining to his activities since leaving the service. JOSEPH G. DIAMOND Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-01912 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01672

    Original file (BC-2005-01672.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel record, they found the discharge consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The evidence of record indicates the applicant was convicted by numerous courts-martial for discharging a fire arm, twice for stealing, and for being absent without leave (AWOL).