Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061848C070421
Original file (2001061848C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 18 June 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001061848

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Karol A. Kennedy Chairperson
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer Member
Mr. Allen L. Raub Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: Through counsel, that while the applicant’s condition had not been diagnosed at the time he enlisted in the Regular Army, he “had a long history of ‘anti-social behaviors,’ ‘acting-out behaviors,’ and long term treatment in six different inpatient programs. He was chemically dependent from age nine on, and most of his middle and late childhood was spent living in institutions, undergoing care and counseling.” Counsel describes several behaviors he alleges that the applicant displayed as a child, and contends that those behaviors are indicative of a person who is autistic. Counsel continues that the applicant has told him that he was attacked and sexually molested while stationed in Italy. However, the applicant was ashamed and did not report the incident. Because of this traumatic incident, added to the stress of military life, the applicant was unable to stop his use of controlled substances to which he had been addicted since childhood. He turned to hashish as a form of self-medication to avoid and escape his problems and to control the anxiety and confusion he was experiencing.

In support of the applicant’s request, counsel submits documents which show the applicant was hospitalized after ingesting half to three quarters of a pint bottle of vodka at age 10. He was institutionalized on 25 July 1978, at age 11, for “being in too many fights,” with a history of misbehavior which “goes back a long way.” On 3 July 1981, the applicant was again institutionalized for behavior problems and drug use. The applicant was given a clinical evaluation on 17 March 1982 which determined that he was chemically dependent on controlled substances. Progress notes from counselors state that the applicant did not wish to quit using drugs, so outpatient treatment for his drug use had little hope of succeeding. In October 1982, the applicant was again institutionalized for his behavior. During that institutionalization he went AWOL; was fired from a job; rode a cousin’s motorcycle without a license, lost control of the motorcycle and did $200.00 worth of damage to a private citizen’s yard; was suspended from school for lighting and throwing firecrackers on school grounds, and quitting jobs. Court documents submitted by the applicant’s counsel show that the applicant was convicted of trespassing, theft of a motorcycle, and fleeing from a police officer resulting in damage to a police car during the chase; and had “three prior police contacts, RE: shoplifting, absenting and damage to property.” Also submitted by counsel are psychological test summaries, which opine that the applicant was free from any mental disorder; that his problems were emotional. In one psychiatric interview with the applicant and his parents, it was stated, “His mother’s concern





is his ability to manipulate people. He is extremely friendly and has ability to con people into doing what he wants them to do.”

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 16 May 1984. As part of his enlistment processing, he was required to complete questionnaires to determine his eligibility to enlist. On his DD Form 1966, Record of Military Processing, Armed Forces of the United States, Item 27, he entered “None” in the space provided for the name and address of his previous employers. On page five of this form, he answered “No” to the questions “Have you ever taken any narcotic substance, sedative, stimulant or tranquilizer drugs, except as prescribed by a licensed physician?” and “Has your use of alcoholic beverages (such as liquor, beer, wine) ever resulted in the loss of a job, arrest by police, or treatment for alcoholism?” and “Have you ever been a patient (whether or not formally committed) in any institution primarily devoted to the treatment of mental, nervous, emotional, psychological or personality disorders?” and “Have you ever been arrested, charged, cited (including traffic violations) or held by any law-enforcement or juvenile authorities in the United States or in a foreign country regardless of whether the citation or charge was dropped or dismissed or you were found not guilty?” and “As a result of being arrested, charged, cited, or held by law-enforcement or juvenile authorities, have you ever been convicted, fined or forfeited bond, or adjudicated a youthful offender or juvenile delinquent (regardless of whether the record in your case has been ‘sealed,’ expunged, or otherwise stricken from the court record)?” and “Have you ever been detained, held in, or served time in, any jail or prison or reform or industrial school or any juvenile facility or correctional institution in the United States or in a foreign country?” In Item “f” of this form, “Explain below ‘yes’ answers given in ‘a’ through ‘d’ above,” the applicant wrote “I have no law violations” and signed his name attesting to the truthfulness of his statement.

The applicant was awarded the military occupational specialty of parachute rigger and was promoted to pay grade E-2.

On 29 July 1985 the applicant pled and was found guilty by a special court-martial of wrongfully using marijuana in the hashish form between 1 January and 12 July 1985. The applicant was sentenced to a BCD, a forfeiture of $413.00, confinement for 31 days, and a reduction to pay grade E-1.







On 27 November 1985, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence of the court-martial. The appropriate authority affirmed and executed the sentence of the court-martial and the applicant was issued a BCD on 2 May 1986.

In accordance with the Autism Research Institute, autism is a severely handicapping disorder which begins at birth or within the first 2 ½ years of life. For many years autism occurred in about 5 children per 10,000 live births. However, since the early 1990's, the rate of autism has increased enormously throughout the world, so that figures as high as 60 per 10,000 are being reported. The reasons for the increase are being debated, but the most likely cause appears to be the over vaccinations of infants. Most autistic children are perfectly normal in appearance, but spend their time engaged in puzzling and disturbing behaviors which are markedly different from those of normal children. They may stare into space for hours, throw uncontrollable tantrums, show no interest in people (including their parents) and pursue strange, repetitive activities with no apparent purpose. They have been described as living in a world of their own. Some autistic individuals are remarkably gifted in certain areas such as music or mathematics, as depicted in the film Rain Man. All need help. What is the Cause? The causes of autism are poorly understood, although it is clear that autism is a biological brain disorder. The Autism Research Institute is investigating various possible causal factors. What is the Outlook? In recent years there has been a marked increase in the percentage of children who have been able to attend school with normal children, and to live more or less independently in community settings. However, the majority of autistic persons remain severely handicapped in their ability to communicate and socialize with other people.

Army Regulation 635-200, Enlisted Personnel, Chapter 7, Section V, paragraph 7-17, states “Fraudulent entry is the procurement of an enlistment, reenlistment, or period of active service through any deliberate material misrepresentation, omission, or concealment of information which, if known and considered by the Army at the time of enlistment or reenlistment, might have resulted in rejection. This includes all disqualifying information requiring a waiver. The concealment of civil convictions, including the concealment of a record as a juvenile offender, is considered fraudulent entry. The concealment of medical defects can be considered fraudulent entry, under certain circumstances. If discharge is approved for fraudulent entry, an honorable, general, or under other than honorable conditions discharge may be issued.”





On 20 August 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board unanimously voted to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge.

Army Regulation 635-40, Physical Evaluation for Retention or Separation, paragraph 4-3, provides that an enlisted soldier who is the subject of elimination action that might result in a discharge under other than honorable conditions may not be processed for medical retirement or discharge.

The Manual for Courts-Martial, R.C.M. 916, provides that it is an affirmative defense to any offense that, at the time of the commission of the acts constituting the offense, the accused, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his or her acts. Mental disease or defect does not otherwise constitute a defense. The accused is presumed to have been mentally responsible at the time of the alleged offense. This presumption continues until the accused establishes, by clear and convincing evidence, that he or she was not mentally responsible at the time of the alleged offense.

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

1. While the applicant’s counsel has submitted a variety of arguments attempting to convince the Board that the applicant is autistic, the Board notes that there is no substantial proof that the applicant is autistic. To the contrary, all the psychiatric tests taken by the applicant resulted in findings that the applicant suffered from emotional problems.

2. However, whether or not the applicant was autistic is really a moot point. There are many people who are autistic who do not use illegal drugs.

3. While the applicant’s sanity is not an issue raised by his counsel, counsel has alluded that the applicant’s alleged autism was the underlying cause of the drug abuse that resulted in his BCD. As such, the Board has opted to address the applicant’s sanity for the simple reason that unless he was insane, he was responsible for the offense which resulted in his BCD. Whether or not he is autistic does not alter that fact. In this regard, the psychiatric tests submitted by the applicant’s counsel consistently diagnose him as being free from any mental disorder.





4. The Board also notes that the applicant’s counsel has proven that the applicant fraudulently enlisted, an offense that in and of itself could result in an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

5. 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

__mhm __ ____alr__ ___kak__ DENY APPLICATION



                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records




INDEX

CASE ID AR2001061848
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 105.0 0
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.




Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04791

    Original file (BC 2013 04791.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04791 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code "2C" (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry-level separation without service characterization of service) be changed to allow him to reenter military service. On 28 Sep 13, the discharge authority directed the applicant be furnished an entry-level separation with...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021424

    Original file (20140021424.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A DD Form 1966 (Application for Enlistment - Armed Forces of the United States) completed in conjunction with his enlistment shows in: a. On 18 July 1979, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant of his intent to initiate separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14 for concealment of his record as a juvenile offender. Item 23 (Type of Separation) "Relief from custody and control of the Army" c....

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014348

    Original file (20140014348.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    If you conceal such records at this time, you may, upon enlistment, be subject to disciplinary actions under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and/or discharged from the military service with an other than honorable discharge. On 18 March 1976, his immediate commander notified him of his intent to initiate separation action against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) due to fraudulent enlistment. His DD Form...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006395

    Original file (20130006395.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged accordingly on 21 October 1976 by reason of voided enlistment. He does not abuse alcohol or drugs and the physician considers him to be of good character. The evidence of record shows the applicant failed to report all of his prior offenses on his enlistment application as required.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017312C071029

    Original file (20060017312C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060017312 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. Moreover, no matter what his recruiter may have told him, the DD Form 1966/5 informed the applicant that concealing a juvenile record at the time of his enlistment could subject him to discharge with an other...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005055

    Original file (20090005055.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A DA Form 3286 (Statements for Enlistment) was completed by the applicant as part of his enlistment processing, prior to him entering military service. A DD Form 398 (Statement of Personal History) was completed by the applicant as part of his enlistment processing, prior to him entering military service. There is also no evidence of record, and the applicant provides insufficient evidence, to support his claim that he suffered the affliction of PTSD as a result of his honorable, wartime...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019821

    Original file (20130019821.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was discharged for fraudulent entry instead. On 15 July 1977, the applicant's immediate commander notified the applicant that discharge proceedings were initiated against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, by reason of fraudulent enlistment. Chapter 14 established policy and prescribed procedures for processing fraudulent entry cases and provided for the administrative disposition of enlisted personnel for misconduct...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002454

    Original file (20140002454.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant does not provide any evidence. If you conceal such records at this time, you may, upon enlistment, be subject to disciplinary actions under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and/or discharge from the military service with other than honorable discharge. His DD Form 214 also shows in: * Item 9c (Authority and Reason), Chapter 14, Army Regulation 635-200 and Separation Program Designator "YKG" * Item 9e (Character of Service) the entry "NA" (not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017271

    Original file (20110017271.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his voided enlistment be upgraded to an honorable discharge. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 21 October 1976 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, by reason of a void enlistment. The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with eight offenses prior to enlisting and it appears he was convicted of one of the offenses.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2014_Navy | ND1400226

    Original file (ND1400226.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYNAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB) DISCHARGE REVIEW DECISIONAL DOCUMENTApplicant’s Issues 1.The Applicant seeks an upgrade to receive service benefits.2. Representation: By a vote of the Characterization shall .By a vote of the Narrative Reason shall .Discussion The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted.In...