Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02690
Original file (BC 2014 02690.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02690

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge due to conviction by court-martial be upgraded to an Honorable discharge. 


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His dismissal was an absolute miscarriage of justice by a questionable court.  He served as a dental officer in an organization whose patients were being mistreated as a result of poor leadership by the commanding officer.  When he attempted to fight the system, he unfairly received a punishment of hard labor and dismissal. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 22 Aug 72.

On 12 Sep 79, the applicant was tried before a general court martial for violation of Article 90 Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  Specifically, he disobeyed a lawful command from his superior commissioned officer to perform his normal patient dental care duties and to see and treat patients as may be assigned to him.  He was found guilty, and sentenced to dismissal from service, confinement at hard labor for one year, and forfeiture of $200 of pay per month for 12 months.  

Under General Court-Martial Order No. 1, dated 19 Feb 81, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the sentence and directed it be executed.  

On 2 Mar 81, the applicant was dismissed from the Air Force, with a narrative reason for separation of “Conviction by Court Martial (other than desertion).”      

A request for post-service information was sent to the applicant on 17 Jul 14 (Exhibit C).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit D.    


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant was tried by general court-martial on 12 Sep 79 for refusing to following direct orders and was found guilty.  He was sentenced to be dismissed from the service, to be confined at hard labor for one year, and to forfeit $200 of pay per month for 12 months.  The Secretary of the Air Force approved the sentence on 19 Feb 81.  The applicant argues he attempted to stand up against injustices that were occurring in the dental office by refusing to see patients in “those conditions.”  However, he provides no documentation to support his contention he was trying to protect patients or that his court-martial was orchestrated by a senior officer.  The application is untimely.  To upgrade the applicant’s discharge now would require the Board to substitute its judgment for the judgment rendered by the court and the convening authority over 30 years ago when the facts and the circumstances were fresh.  

A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E).


FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  Applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction    36-2603.  Applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits.  Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner.  

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02690 in Executive Session on 16 Apr 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Jul 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jul 14, w/atch.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 3 Oct 14.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.

						

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00779

    Original file (BC 2014 00779.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because he wanted his record corrected since his discharge and is thankful to have the opportunity. On 17 Jun 82, the Air Force Court for Military Review found the approved findings and sentence were correct in law and fact. The requested relief cannot be done administratively given the application was received more than three (3) years since he was court-martialed and discharged.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04846

    Original file (BC 2013 04846.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Unfortunately, JAJM does not have any record of the applicant’s court martial so it is difficult to make a well informed recommendation. Through research, they determined that he filed a petition for grant of review with the United States Court of Military Appeals on 10 May 82 and the Court denied the petition on 23 Jun 82. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05240

    Original file (BC 2013 05240.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The court-martial was based on charges that occurred on 8 Jan 83; Charge I: for unlawfully striking someone with his hands and fists; Charge II: participating in a breach of the peace by ejecting someone from his barracks room; by assaulting that person at or near his barracks; by directing insulting language toward that person near his barracks; Charge III, failed to obey a lawful order to produce a military ID card; Charge IV, on 9 Jan 83, he was disrespectful in language and deportment...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00686

    Original file (BC 2014 00686.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00686 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge be upgraded to Honorable. On 6 Sep 79, the applicant received an Article 15, Nonjudicial Punishment, for two violations of Article 86, failure to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02552

    Original file (BC-2007-02552.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02552 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be changed to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. On 4 May 53, the convening authority suspended the bad conduct discharge until the applicant’s release from confinement or until...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05819

    Original file (BC 2013 05819.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05819 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable conditions). Based on a review of the record, JAJM finds no error or injustice with the military justice process which would warrant upgrading the applicant’s discharge to a general (under honorable conditions)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-02627

    Original file (BC-2009-02627.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-02627 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His dishonorable discharge be upgraded to general. He was credited with 2 years, 2 months and 17 days of service to include 3 years, 5 months and 3 days of lost time due to confinement. We took notice of the applicant's complete...

  • 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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-01975

    Original file (BC-2010-01975.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2010 | BC-2009-03852

    Original file (BC-2009-03852.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She pled not guilty to the charge and specifications; however, a panel of officers and enlisted personnel found her guilty of the charge and all specifications except the specification of wrongful transfer of cocaine. One of the witnesses testified that he and the applicant used marijuana together five to ten times during one three month period. 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...