Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710620
Original file (9710620.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was not guilty of the offense for which he was charged, but his civilian attorney recommended that he “plead guilty since blacks did not fare well in cases like this.”

COUNSEL CONTENDS : That the Board should grant clemency and change the discharge as requested by the applicant.

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

He was born on 30 January 1940. He completed 10 years of formal education but later completed his high school GED. On 27 November 1957, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 140.00 (Field Artillery Basic).

On 7 April 1960, the applicant was convicted by a special-court martial of assault on a German national by striking him on the face with his fist. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 1 month, hard labor without confinement for 2 months, to be reduced to pay grade E-1, and to forfeit $40 pay for 3 months.

On 6 June 1960, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave from 1700 hours 20 May - 0200 hours 21 May 1960 and from 2400 hours 23 May - 1000 hours 24 May 1960 and of making a false official statement. He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 45 days, hard labor without confinement for 45 days and to forfeit $43 pay for 3 months.

On 24 September 1960, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial, in a joint trial with seven other defendants, of assault on a person then in execution of military police duties and of participating in a breach of peace. His approved sentence was to receive a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be reduced to pay grade E-1 and to be confined at hard labor for 9 months.

On 16 January 1961, the U.S. Army Board of Review affirmed the sentence.

On 25 March 1961, the applicant was discharged, with a bad conduct discharge, pursuant to his court-martial sentence.

Title 10, U.S. 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, 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.
The applicant did not have to follow his attorney’s advice; he did not have to plead guilty. 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. There is no evidence in the available records or in the applicant’s supporting documentation to demonstrate that he was the victim of racial prejudice.

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
                                   Loren G. Harrell
                                            Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710620C070209

    Original file (9710620C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was not guilty of the offense for which he was charged, but his civilian attorney recommended that he “plead guilty since blacks did not fare well in cases like this.” COUNSEL CONTENDS: That the Board should grant clemency and change the discharge as requested by the applicant. His approved sentence was to receive a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be reduced to pay grade E-1 and to be confined at hard labor for 9 months. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605314C070209

    Original file (9605314C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general court-martial conviction be set aside and that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable or, in effect, general. On 7 January 1970, the rehearing was conducted and the applicant was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 1 year and a BCD. The applicant has not demonstrated, and the record does not support, that he had a substance abuse or mental illness problem.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608465C070209

    Original file (9608465C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 July 1959 the applicant was tried by general court-martial for four specifications of violation of Article 123 (two specifications of forgery and two specifications of uttering bad checks). He pleaded and was found guilty of all charges and specifications and was sentenced to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit $55.00 a month for 24 months, to be confined at hard labor for 24 months, and to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. DISCUSSION:...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084737C070212

    Original file (2003084737C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The convening authority approved the sentence on 28 August; but the execution thereof was suspended until he was released from confinement. This regulation provides that a soldier will be given a dishonorable discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general court-martial empowered to impose a dishonorable discharge. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605091C070209

    Original file (9605091C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 4 June 1979 he pleaded guilty to four specifications of violation of Article 86, UCMJ (214 days AWOL) before a special court-martial convened at the USARB and was sentenced to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018925

    Original file (20070018925.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 October 1976, in a pretrial agreement, the applicant agreed to plead guilty to a violation of Article 134, assault with the intent to commit robbery, provided that the convening authority approved a sentence of no more than a bad conduct discharge and confinement at hard labor for no more than 20 months, but with no agreement as to forfeitures or reductions. On 13 January 1977, the Staff Judge Advocate, in a written review for the convening authority, summarized the evidence and trial...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010621

    Original file (20140010621.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his record to: * expunge his Special Court-Martial (SPCM) * upgrade his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) to an honorable discharge * amend item 27 (Reenlistment (RE) Code) of his DD Form 214 to show he received an RE Code of "1" or "3" 2. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged with a BCD on 28 June 1983, in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-1 as a result of court-martial, and that he received...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018019C070206

    Original file (20050018019C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 June 1961, the convening authority approved the sentence but suspended the confinement at hard labor for 3 months. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077695C070215

    Original file (2002077695C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was released from confinement on 10 August 1960 pursuant to the modification of the sentence announced in Special Court-Martial Order Number 5, Headquarters, US Army, Hawaii, dated 9 August 1960, which directed that so much of the earlier approved sentence in excess of confinement at hard labor for 1 month and forfeiture of $43.00 per month for 1 month was set aside. The applicant was discharged on 30 January 1961 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. DISCUSSION :...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710192

    Original file (9710192.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS : In effect, reconsideration of his request for an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (dismissal from service as a result of trial by general court-martial) which this Board denied on 20 April 1978. The applicant was sentenced to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be confined at hard labor for one year, and to be reduced to private/E-1. However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, including...