FD97-00459-A
dvise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
edition will be used
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE
CASE NUMBER
FD97-00459-A
GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.
The applicant appeared before the Board without counsel at the Air Reserve Personnel Center, Denver,
Colorado, on 22 Oct 03. The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:
Exhibit 5: Applicant's contentions.
Exhibit 6: Character Letter from
Exhibit 7: 1'' United Methodist
Exhibit 8: Cheyenne Symphony Orchestra Letter
Exhibit 9: Laramie County Co
Exhibit 10: Thank You Letter
Exhibit 1 1 : Character Letter fr
Exhibit 12: 1" United Method
Exhibit 13 : Character Letter
Exhibit 14: Character Letter
Exhibit 15: Wyoming Tribune-Eagle Weekly Entertainment Guide Featuring Mr.
Exhibit 16: Western Trial Advocacy Letter, dated 18 May 98
orandurn, dated 10 Jan 97
dated 15 Jul02
18 JdO3
The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.
FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied.
The Board finds that the evidence provided by the applicant does not warrant a grant of clemency in this
case.
ISSUES:
Applicant contends his discharge was too harsh and that his post service conduct warrants a grant of
clemency and upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to an honorable discharge. The records indicated
that the applicant, then a staff sergeant, pled guilty at a special court-martial in November 1992 to one
specification of the wrongful use of marijuana. He was found guilty and sentenced to a BCD, 15 days
confinement and a reduction to senior airman (E-4). After his court-martial conviction and sentence were
approved by the convening authority and upheld by the appellate courts, his BCD was executed in
November 1993. Under affirmation before the Board, the applicant admitted to post-service drug use,
including marijuana and "speed," on multiple occasions. The applicant stated in his request for upgrade that
he "accepted full responsibility for his actions" surrounding the wrongful use of marijuana on active duty.
Before the Board, however, he testified that he believes he was not at fault for his ingestion of THC, the
metabolite in marijuana, because someone had "shot gunned" the marijuana smoke into his mouth while he
was highly intoxicated. The Board concluded that this latest version of the facts does not support the
assertion that the applicant had accepted full responsibility for his actions. Additionally, it conflicts with the
applicant's knowing and willing plea of guilty to the wrongful use of marijuana at his court-martial.
CONCLUSIONS: The applicant received a BCD, a punitive discharge, as part of his sentence resulting
from a special court-martial conviction. Under the provisions of Title 10 United States Code, Section 1553,
the only basis for a change of a Bad Conduct discharge is clemency. The applicant presented evidence
which the DRB opined did not warrant granting clemency.
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01174
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01174 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an general (under honorable conditions) discharge. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01688
As punishment, the applicant received a BCD and a reduction to the grade of Airman First Class. 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 C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence or an error or injustice. Based on the evidence of record, we cannot conclude...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03860
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03860 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. The applicant was discharged effective 5 February 1991 with a BCD and a narrative reason for separation of Conviction by Court- Martial (Other than Desertion). He served 3 years, 6 months, and 22 days on...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2005-02137
On 20 Aug 07, counsel filed an addendum, with additional documents, to the applicant’s 5 Jun 05 request for relief to the Board (Exhibit C). The appellate courts found his conviction and sentence correct in fact and law. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2001-0494
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD2001-0494 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of his Bad Conduct Discharge to Honorable. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2001-0494 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD ee (Former AB) 1. The accused pleaded not guilty to the Specification of Charge II and Charge II which was withdrawn after arraignment.
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2001-0353
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | ppo001-0353 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. Plea: G. Finding: G. Specification: Did, at or near Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska, between on or about 11 May 1995 and on or about 16 May 1995, wrongfully use marijuana, Plea: G. Finding: G. SENTENCE Sentence adjudged on 19 July 1995: Bad conduct discharge, 30 days confinement, and reduction to the pay grade of E-1. Sentencing evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03447
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03447 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. Based on the documents provided by the applicant and the limited information in the Air Force Automated Military Justice Analysis and Management System (AMJAMS), there is no apparent error or injustice in...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01336
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01336 INDEX CODE: 106.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. However, after thorough review of the evidence of record, it is our opinion that the comments of the office of the Judge Advocate are...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01858
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01858 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general discharge. The applicants sentence to a BCD and confinement for 24 months was well within the legal limit and was appropriate punishment for the offenses committed. We have considered the...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03460
Also note, this search was predicated on his use and possession of marijuana and the theft of government property. He also requests review of his APRs covering the time period of his alleged misconduct. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that...