Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706383
Original file (9706383.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that although he accepts responsibility for his AWOL offenses, he lacked maturity and dedication. He also cites a presidential pardon and clemency discharge under Presidential Proclamation 4313 in which he received on 18 August 1975. He is currently working in armed robbery prevention for a major supermarket chain and holds a Pennsylvania Act 235 Lethal Weapon Certification as well as a Philadelphia Concealer carry permit. He recently applied for work as a police/corrections officer with the city of Philadelphia. He was told by inside friends that his past mistakes in the Army are the reason why neither agency will hire him.

 EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show:

 He was born on 4 September 1948. He enlisted in the Army on 1 November 1965 for three years. He was awarded military occupation specialty 11B10 (Light Weapons Infantryman).
On 6 October 1983, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army with the same MOS. The highest paygrade he achieved was E-4.

On 26 July 1985, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP), under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for being absent without leave (AWOL) during the period of 10 July 1985 to 15 July 1985. His imposed punishment was reduction to paygrade E-3, forfeiture of $185.00 (suspended for 6 months) and confinement for 7 days.

On 18 November 1985, the applicant accepted NJP, under Article 15, UCMJ, for willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer. His imposed punishment was reduction to paygrade E-2, 14 days extra duty and 14 days restriction.

On 24 February 1986, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of making and uttering 20 worthless checks totaling $1,389.62 and one count of breaking restriction. His approved sentence was reduction to paygrade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 4 months, and a BCD.

On 12 May 1986, the Court of Military Review, affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.

On 21 May 1986, the Court of Military Appeals held the findings of guilty and sentence as approved by the convening authority correct in law and fact. Accordingly, the findings of guilty and the sentence were affirmed.

On 8 December 1986, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Section IV, as a result of a court-martial, under other than honorable conditions with a BCD certificate. He had completed 3 years, 2 months and 4 days creditable and 90 days of lost time of service. He was awarded the Army Achievement Medal, Army Service Ribbon, Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Marksmanship Badge (Rifle M-16).

Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, as amended, precludes any action by this Board which would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.

 DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2. Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense charged. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

3. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his allegation or request.

4. There is no evidence in the available records to demonstrate that the applicant was the victim of racial prejudice, the evidence does show the applicant to be a Caucasian male. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

 DETERMINATION : The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

 BOARD VOTE :
GRANT

 GRANT FORMAL HEARING

 DENY APPLICATION


                  Loren G. Harrell
                   Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706383C070209

    Original file (9706383C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    He enlisted in the Army on 1 November 1965 for three years. His approved sentence was reduction to paygrade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 4 months, and a BCD. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 199607965C070209

    Original file (199607965C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His approved sentence was reduction to paygrade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 4 months, and a BCD. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his allegation or request.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022685

    Original file (20120022685.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He accepted a position with the Navy Ships Systems Engineering Station, but after 2 years he decided to return to military life. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019308

    Original file (20100019308.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The evidence of record does not support granting the applicant clemency. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012133

    Original file (20100012133.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 November 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100012133 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to a general discharge. The conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2002_Navy | ND02-01233

    Original file (ND02-01233.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION I was receiving treatment in the Wilmington, Delaware VA from Dec 2000 to Aug 2002. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:Naval Council of Personnel Boards Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board 720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309 Washington Navy Yard D.C. 20374-5023

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018844

    Original file (20100018844.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general discharge. However, his service record shows he was arrested twice and convicted once by civil authorities and he was convicted by a general court-martial for wrongful distribution of marijuana during the period under review. His character references were also acknowledged; however, these documents are insufficient as a basis to grant the relief requested.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016185

    Original file (20110016185.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged, but the execution of the sentence adjudging confinement in excess of 4 months was suspended for 6 months, with provision for the suspended portion of the sentence to be automatically...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014202

    Original file (20070014202.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 31 December 1985, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence. The applicant has provided no evidence to show that his discharge was unjust at the time of his offenses. It is noted that if the applicant was found guilty of the charged offenses today, and was convicted at a trial by court-martial, the maximum sentence that may be imposed for a single violation of Article 112a, would be a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002730

    Original file (20130002730.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 May 1987, the LAARNG discharged the applicant with a bad conduct discharge. Chapter 3, section IV, established policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge and provided that a Soldier would be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. However, many Soldiers enlisted at a young age,...