Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709691
Original file (9709691.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he has paid for the mistakes which lead to his discharge and submits more than 40 letters from family members and friends attesting to his character. He notes he never intended to desert the Army but left on both occasions because of extreme pressures and stress which were causing him to experience severe nervous problems. He regrets accepting the plea bargain which lead to his discharge and has “always known that [he] made a terrible mistake doing that, because [he] did not desert the Army.” He states he “went absent without leave with full intent to go back.”

EVIDENCE OF RECORD : With the exception of some finance records, the applicant’s military records are not available. However, information reconstructed from his 1958 court-martial shows:

He enlisted on 6 April 1954 at the age of 18 and was discharged for the purpose of immediate reenlistment in June 1956.

In January 1958, while at Fort Hood, Texas the applicant departed AWOL “because his request for a transfer was denied.” He was apprehended in April 1958, returned to military control and court-martialed.

On 18 June 1958, while at Fort Lewis, Washington, he again departed AWOL. He was apprehended by civilian authorities on 11 November 1958.

During his general court-martial, which took place in December 1958, the applicant noted “he had no particular reason for committing the instant offense” and that he had “no particular desire to return to duty because he [was] anxious to marry his fiancee….” He also noted, however, that he realized the foolishness of his conduct and was confident he could “soldier effectively” if he were restored to duty. As a result of the court-martial the applicant was ultimately sentenced to a bad conduct discharge, 9 months confinement at hard labor, and total forfeiture of pay and allowances.

His bad conduct discharge was effective 25 March 1959.

The Manual for courts-martial, then in effect, Table of Maximum Punishments authorized dishonorable discharge, confinement for 3 years, and total forfeitures for the offense of desertion.

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

1. Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense charge. Conviction and discharge were effected n accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. In particular it is noted that the applicant had two periods of desertion, the second longer than the first.

2. The applicant’s contention that his desertion periods were the result of serious medical problems is not supported by any evidence in available records nor furnished by the applicant. The applicant’s nearly four years of successful service before his first period of desertion demonstrated his ability for honorable service.

3. Although his post-service accomplishments are noted they do not outweigh the seriousness of the offense and do not provide an adequate basis upon which the Board would grant relief. These factors do, however, demonstrate his capacity for proper behavior.

4. 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



                                                      Karl F. Schneider
                                                      Acting Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709691C070209

    Original file (9709691C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    His bad conduct discharge was effective 25 March 1959. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: 1. In particular it is noted that the applicant had two periods of desertion, the second longer than the first.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018476

    Original file (20140018476.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    These are the reasons he could not perform his military duties. On 15 September 1972, he requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial. The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service in...

  • CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2009-096

    Original file (2009-096.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. While his military record contains many medical records, there is no record of any injury aboard a ship or of any hospitali- zation for such an injury. of the current Personnel Manual, it is possible that a member today who had, like the applicant, been AOL for more than nine months after previously having been AWOL for about four months,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00426

    Original file (MD02-00426.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00426 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020221, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. (DAV Issue) After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Naval Discharge Review Board or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, we continue to support the contentions as set forth by the Applicant,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090011609

    Original file (20090011609.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 13 January 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-212 by reason of unfitness and directed the applicant be furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Accordingly, on 23 January 1969, the applicant was discharged from the Army. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge confirms he was discharged with a character of service of under other than honorable conditions and issued an Undesirable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089406C070403

    Original file (2003089406C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that they have been briefed and understand the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge they might receive. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017438C070206

    Original file (20050017438C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests to present his case before a formal panel of the Board. The applicant states his command did not take into consideration his nearly eight years of honorable service. Pursuant to Article 66(b), UCMJ, the record of trial was referred to the United States Army Court of Military Review (ACMR).

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012371

    Original file (20060012371.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 April 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060012371 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 Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. However, reassessing the sentence, the Board of Review further determined that on the basis of the entire record,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007578

    Original file (20080007578.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 17 July 1973, the FSM surrendered to military authorities at Fort Dix, New Jersey, where charges were preferred against him for the AWOL charge. On 18 October 1973, the United States Army Court of Military Review (USACMR) having found the findings of guilty and sentence as approved by proper authority correct in law and fact and having determined, on the basis of the entire record, that the findings of guilty and only so much of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070855C070402

    Original file (2002070855C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, in this case, the Board finds the evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and that his trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense with which he was charged. The evidence of record does confirm that the applicant ultimately received a BCD, as indicated in the court-martial record, and that his separation document incorrectly lists the type of discharge as a DD. ...