Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9507889C070209
Original file (9507889C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved
2.  The applicant requests that his dishonorable discharge (DD) be upgraded to honorable and the reason for separation be changed to convenience of the Government.  He stresses the extenuating and mitigating circumstances of his case and cites 40 years of good post-service citizenship.

3.  The applicant was born on 5 November 1934 and enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 4 June 1953.  He was sent to Camp Roberts, California, for his required military training and, while there, he received a summary court-martial for stealing another soldier’s fatigue uniforms from a clothesline.  He stated that his fatigues had been taken and, when he reported it to his commander, he was told to take someone else’s clothes.

4.  After completing his training, the applicant was transferred to Germany and given leave en route to the debarkation point, Camp Kilmer, New Jersey.  While home on leave, he contacted Camp Kilmer to seek a 4 day extension in order to celebrate his birthday at home.  When he arrived in Germany, he was charged with 4 days’ absence without leave (AWOL) and tried by a summary court-martial.

5.  The applicant’s service in Germany was excellent from December 1953 to 30 July 1955.  During that time, he was promoted to the rank of Specialist 3 and received excellent conduct and efficiency ratings.  On 30 July 1955, he was on pass and went to town where he drank cognac with a newly promoted sergeant.  After leaving the German bar, he went to a German brothel where he sent the madam’s son to buy beer which he then consumed.  After drinking the beer, he became sleepy and went to sleep in a girl’s room.  The girl’s boyfriend, a sergeant, came by and threw him out.  The applicant went back to the barracks and got a carbine and magazine of ammunition.  He returned to the brothel and threatened the sergeant and the German girl by pointing the carbine at them and showing them the loaded magazine.  After doing this, he left.

6.  On 26 August 1955, the applicant was tried by a general court-martial for two specifications of aggravated assault. Contrary to his plea, he was found guilty and sentenced to a DD, 1 years’ confinement, and total forfeiture of all pay and allowances.  He was transferred to the Branch United States Disciplinary Barracks, New Cumberland, Pennsylvania, where he served his sentence.  His DD was executed on 9 February 1956.  He had 2 years, 2 months, and 18 days of creditable service and 172 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

10.  The applicant has no criminal record with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).  He provided several letters of support from friends, employers, and family members attesting to his good character.

11.  The Military Justice Act of 1983 (Public Law 98-209), provides, in pertinent part, that military correction boards may not disturb the finality of a conviction by court-martial.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was a good soldier with two very minor disciplinary violations when he demonstrated extremely poor judgment on the night of 30 July 1955.  His trial by general court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations.

2.  The applicant did not physically harm his two victims; he apparently only sought to frighten them and, although convicted of aggravated assault, there is some confusion about whether the carbine was actually loaded when it was pointed at the victims.  Also, the two summary court-martial convictions were introduced by the prosecution in order to portray the applicant as an habitual offender.

3.  While the Board cannot, by law, disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction, it can mitigate the punishment when deemed appropriate.  In this situation, the documented evidence, as well as the applicant's record, justifies mitigation.  It would, therefore, be unjust and inequitable to continue, after 40 years, to cause the applicant to suffer the stigma of a DD.

4.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, and in the interest of justice and equity, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as indicated below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was separated from the service by reason of court-martial with a General Discharge Certificate on 9 February 1956.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




		                           
		        CHAIRPERSON

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075849C070403

    Original file (2002075849C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973. On 25 April 1956, the ABCMR determined that the applicant had submitted insufficient evidence to indicate probable material error or injustice and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015477

    Original file (20060015477.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FSM's WD AGO Form 53-57, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Dishonorable Discharge, shows he was inducted on 9 June 1943 and entered active duty on the same date at the age of 20 years and 9 months. Her brother was sick with Rheumatic Fever and was admitted into the Government hospital. Medical-related records do show the FSM had contracted Rheumatic Fever in 1941, years before he was inducted into the Army.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062412C070421

    Original file (2001062412C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 25 February 1955, he was dishonorably discharged pursuant to the sentence of a general court-martial. He asserted that it was never proven that the camera he was accused of stealing was the property of the other soldier and that if the record of trial was reviewed, it would show that he was right.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014043

    Original file (20100014043.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There are no orders or other evidence in the applicant's military personnel records that shows he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal. (2) The applicant served a qualifying period for award of the Korea Defense Service Medal from 4 August 1954 to 17 November 1955. Records show the applicant served a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004115

    Original file (20070004115.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070004115 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The records available to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records were provided in part by the applicant and from reconstructed records. On 14 August 1953, the appropriate authority approved the applicant's...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081070C070215

    Original file (2002081070C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 12 July 1955, the applicant was found guilty by a General Court-Martial for being AWOL from 23 April to 2 May 1955, and for being AWOL from 18 May to 1 June 1955. While trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged, and his conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, the possibility that the applicant suffered from PTSD, his 20 months of honorable service, and his combat service must also be considered in the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060808C070421

    Original file (2001060808C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of his military records to reflect sufficient Reserve Component service credit to receive retired pay. For the time that the applicant was appointed an officer in the ARNG, 1 June 1955 through 28 February 1959, only the period of 1 June 1955 through 6 June 1956, is credited with retirement points as 1 year creditable for retired pay at age 60.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013413

    Original file (20060013413.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 30 June 1954, the applicant, at a general court-martial (GCM) pled not guilty to the charge of desertion and guilty to the lesser included offense of AWOL for the period from 21 February to 8 June 1954. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was wounded in action against a hostile force on 1 December 1952; received medical treatment, and is "entitled" to the Purple Heart. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002904

    Original file (20150002904.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records contain his DA Form 24 (Service Record). He was given a dishonorable discharge pursuant to a general court-martial empowered to adjudge such a discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015852

    Original file (20110015852.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) to show: * he attended cook's school * awards for overseas service in Germany 2. The applicant served during two period of active service for which he was issued two separate DD Forms 214. a. There were no service medals for duty in Germany during the applicant's period of service; however, the National Defense Service Medal was awarded for any period of active service...