RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01326
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The articles of judgments against him were racially motivated. He
always let his superiors know what was going on prior to any
issues he might have had returning to work. He used another
airmans motorcycle with his permission, but it broke down. When
he tried calling the first sergeant, no one was there. This
resulted in him receiving harsh treatment and an Article 15. He
was called the N word and received death threats based on his
race. Though he feared for his life, he received no help or
protection from his superiors. His commander ordered him to take
a psychiatric evaluation.
In Jul 80, things went from bad to worse when he broke into the
firework stand. He took full responsibility for his actions.
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to excuse his
failure to timely file his application because he has taken
responsibility for his actions.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 26 Dec 78, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force as an E-
1.
On 21 Nov 80, he was convicted by Special Court-Martial for
larceny and for stealing fireworks valued at approximately
$1395.06, in violation of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice,
Article 121. He was sentenced to a BCD, to be confined at hard
labor for six months, to forfeit $299.00 per month for six months,
and to be reduced in rank to airman basic.
On 4 Jan 82, the applicant received a BCD. He was credited with
2 years, 7 months, and 24 days of active service.
On 1 Aug 2014, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. The applicant pled guilty to two
charges, larceny (in violation of UCMJ, Article 121) and
housebreaking (in violation of UCMJ, Article 130), in front of a
special court-martial convened on 19 Aug 80. The applicant was
sentenced to a BCD, confinement of six months, forfeiture of
$299.00 per month for six months, and to a reduction in grade to
E-1.
On 11 Jun 81, the United States Court of Military Review reviewed
and affirmed the findings of guilty. He was afforded an
opportunity for rehabilitation but did not report on time for
duty. The applicant was given the choice to leave rehabilitation,
and selected that option. If the applicant had completed the
program, he would have had the opportunity to return to duty
following a review by the clemency and parole board, and a one
year probation period.
In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1552(f)(2), the Board may take
"action on the sentence of a court-martial for purposes of
clemency." JAJM does not believe there is any error or injustice
with the court-martial process which would warrant changing the
applicant's approved court-martial sentence.
The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
There has been a cover-up regarding his reporting of death
threats. He was not lying when he received those death threats.
The major and his superior had it out for him. About six months
before he filed his application, he ran into a fellow sergeant
stationed at the base the same time he was. This sergeant
convinced him to file his application because he also believed the
major had it out for him.
The applicants complete review is at 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 an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants 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 the
applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
basis to recommend granting the requested relief.
4. The applicants case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-01326 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 4 Jul 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Aug 14.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Aug 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00594
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00594 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 SEP 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). The Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings and sentence on 2 Feb 01. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc-2013-01459
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty and General Court-Martial Order The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2009-03787
A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 8 Dec 10 for review and comment, within 30 days. We have carefully reviewed the applicant’s submission and the evidence of record and do not fine a sufficient basis to excuse the untimely filing of this application. The applicant did not file within three...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01778
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01778 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to General (under honorable conditions). On 16 Sep 74, the Board of Review approved the findings and the sentence was executed. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-04506
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-01739
He receive a Presidential pardon removing his court-martial conviction and bad conduct discharge (BCD) from his record. The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. As such, applicant's request for a Presidential pardon is not possible since such action is not within the purview of this Board's authority.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01975
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01975 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to general. The AFLOA/JAJM complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded that...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04288
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00526
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00526 INDEX CODE: 110.02, 106.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 Aug 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 1989 bad conduct discharge (BCD) by special court-martial (SCM) be changed to a medical discharge [presumably with an honorable or general characterization of service]. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05280
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.