RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03222
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a General discharge based upon clemency.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was discharged without being allowed legal representation. Although he went Absent Without Leave (AWOL) twice, he went home to address problems with his family. His father was very abusive to his mother. She became sick, leaving his grandmother with four kids, and no one to support them. He went home to work their farm. Now, he is dying of terminal brain cancer, and would like a military funeral.
After his service he worked as a Police Officer, and a construction worker. He has been married since 1982, and raised a family.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 19 Oct 65.
On or about 13 Dec 65, the applicant, without proper authority, absented himself from his organization and remained absent until on or about 7 Jan 66.
On for about 14 Jan 66, the applicant, without proper authority, absented himself from his organization and remained absent until on or about 21 Feb 66.
On 11 Mar 66, the applicant was tried at a Special Court-Martial for violation of Article 86, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Specifically, he was charged with two instances of being absent without leave (AWOL). He pled guilty and was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for six months and forfeiture of $60.00 per months for six months.
On or about 21 Sep 66, the applicant, without proper authority, absented himself from his organization and remained absent until on or about 2 Nov 66.
On 23 Nov 66, the applicant was tried by court-martial of violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ, to which he pled guilty. For this he was sentenced to a BCD, confinement to hard labor for six months, and forfeiture of $60.00 per month for six months.
On 28 Feb 67, in compliance with Special Court-Martial Order Number 62, dated 22 Dec 66, the applicant was discharged on 23 Nov 66.
On 2 Aug 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. In response, the applicants next of kin provided what appears to be an excerpt from the former members obituary (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 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 applicants 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). While the applicant argues he was not afforded legal representation during his court martials, other than his own uncorroborated assertions, he has presented no evidence whatsoever in support of this argument. We have considered the applicants overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, and the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the applicants discharge on the basis of clemency. However, in the absence of sufficient evidence related to the applicants post-service activities that would enable us to determine if his accomplishments since his discharge are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged, 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-2014-03222 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 2 Aug 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Aug 14, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicants Next of Kin, Undated.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 16 Dec 66, he was discharged with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions). Exhibit C. FBI Report, dated 16 Dec 99. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Panel Chair AFBCMR 99-01778 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1999-01111
The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant has not submitted any material or documentation to show that he was unfit due to a physical disability at the time of his discharge. The AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to...
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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-03596
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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-04738
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04738 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. We find no evidence which indicates the applicants service characterization, which had its basis in his conviction by special court-martial and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00866
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010198
The applicant requests that his dishonorable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The members of the court-martial found him guilty of the charge and specification and sentenced him to total forfeitures, confinement at hard labor for 1 year, and a dishonorable discharge. On 7 January 1958, the Board of Review, United States Army, affirmed the sentence.
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes his dishonorable discharge was improper and harsh since it was during a time period of 1 year and 5 months of service with no other criminal record. Applicant pled guilty to all charges except Charge I, and all specifications except specifications 2 and 3 of Charge IV. A complete copy of the FBI Report is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05158
He simply requests an upgrade to his BCD based on the circumstances at the time he was court-martialed along with the positive progress he has made since his discharge. As of this date, this office has not received a response. We find no evidence which indicates the applicants service characterization, which had its basis in his 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02164
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 their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 30 Jul 04. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 04.