RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03857
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general (under honorable
conditions).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His infraction was minor. His Airman Performance Reports were
nearly perfect but that was not taken into consideration. He has
had no infractions since that time.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force. He was
discharged on 22 February 1985 with a bad conduct discharge.
On 6 November 2014, 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 remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application is
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility (OPR) which is included at Exhibit D.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. The applicant was tried by a
special court-martial convened at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada.
A military judge found the applicant guilty, in accordance with
his plea, of one charge and two specifications, in violation of
Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for wrongful use of
marijuana and wrongful use of cocaine.
On 31 May 1984, the military judge sentenced the applicant to be
discharged with a bad conduct discharge, confined at hard labor
for three months, to be reduced to the grade of airman basic and
to forfeit $397.00 pay per month for three months. On 6 July
1984, the convening authority approved only so much of the
sentence that provided for a bad conduct discharge, confinement at
hard labor for two months, forfeitures of $397.00 pay per month
for two months and reduction to airman basic. The record was
forwarded to the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals, who affirmed
the findings and sentence. Final action was taken on the case on
19 February 1985.
The punishment, adjudged by a military judge and approved by the
convening authority, was within the range of permissible
punishments. The applicant was afforded all of his appellate
rights. In accordance with 10 USC 1552(f), the Board has no
authority to overturn the court-martial conviction, but may only
on the basis of clemency, correct actions taken by the reviewing
authorities, i.e., the sentence. However, in this case, the
applicant submitted no evidence in support of clemency.
There was no error or injustice with the processing of the court-
martial.
The complete 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 17 February 2015 (Exhibit E) for review and comment within
30 days. 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 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). 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.
There was no evidence submitted attesting to the applicants post-
service accomplishments to conclude that clemency is warranted at
this time. 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 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-2014-03857 in Executive Session on 30 April 2015, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Sep 14, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Record Excerpts.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Nov 14, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 7 Jan 15.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 15.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03229
JAJM states that upgrading the applicants BCD is not appropriate and recommends the Board deny the request as untimely or on the merits. It also indicates that a bad conduct discharge is more than merely a service characterization; it is a punishment for the crimes the applicant committed while a member of the armed forces. While JAJM states that a BCD is for bad conduct and more than merely a service characterization, all his charges stemmed from one incident.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00715
Pursuant to the Boards request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) provided a copy of an Investigative Report, which is at Exhibit C. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is attached at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00514
In an undated letter, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. Based on the military justice records in this case and consistent with the decision of the Air Force Court of Military Review, JAJM recommends the Board not grant relief based on any error or injustice with the court- martial process. We considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, after considering the applicant's overall quality of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04408
His service was terminated by a BCD. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Air Force Office of Special Investigation determined a criminal record does exist. Based on the military justice records in this case and consistent with the decision of the Air Force Court of Military Review, JAJM recommends the Board not grant relief based on any error or injustice with the court- martial process.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04272
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04272 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general discharge. We also find no evidence which indicates the applicants service characterization, which had its basis in his conviction by general court-martial and was a part of the sentence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05855
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A. His punishment consisted of forfeiture of $100.00 of pay per month for two months and a reduction to the grade of airman, suspended until 5 March 1973, at which time, unless the suspension was sooner vacated, it would be remitted without further action. On 28 February 1974, the applicant was furnished with a BCD, and was credited with 2 years, 3 months, and 3 days of active service, excluding lost time from 5 April 1973 to 9...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02051
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02051 COUNSEL: JOHN E. FITZGIBBONS HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His court-martial conviction be set aside and his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The only reason he testified at his court-martial, was to show the members that the Air Force entrapped him. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03182
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03182 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable. In accordance with 10 USC 1552(f), the Board has no authority to overturn the court-martial conviction but may only on the basis of clemency, correct the actions taken by the reviewing authorities, i.e., the sentence. The complete AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03529
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03529 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to General (Under Honorable Conditions). As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E.) The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02717
On 18 July 1973, the applicant received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for failure to go to his place of duty, in violation of Article 86, UCMJ. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 27 February 2015 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). We took notice of the applicants complete...