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 applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants 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
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709691
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: 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018476
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...
USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00426
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,...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2009-096
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,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04088
General Court-Martial Order #15, dated 29 February 1968 indicates that the sentence to a bad conduct discharge, confinement and forfeitures were vacated and that the punishment would be executed. While the applicant believes his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded due to the unfair treatment and excessive sentence he received, we note that the approved sentence of the military court was within the maximum punishment authorized by the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070855C070402
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. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030541
Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. He was sentenced to a reduction to the grade of private/pay grade E-1, forfeiture of $80.00 per month for a period of six months, confinement at hard labor for a period of six months, and a BCD. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012371
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 | CY2003 | 2003089406C070403
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 | CY2009 | 20090011609
On 13 January 1969, the separation authority approved the applicants 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...