| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his dishonorable discharge be upgraded to a general or honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was within months of his scheduled separation date when he made one “terrible decision.” He states that “the devil in (him)” allowed him to justify his actions by believing that he was not really hurting anyone, that no one would ever find out, and that he “could really use the money.” He states that he made restitution on the money he took and now asks the Board to consider that he was a “20 year old immature kid” at the time and is now an “honorable, hardworking 34 year old husband with two kids.” He submits no evidence in support of his request. Although less than 15 years have elapsed since the applicant was discharged, the Army Discharge Review Board is precluded from acting on the request to upgrade the applicant’s discharge because the discharge resulted from a general court-martial. However, in the interest of time, a DD Form 293 was accepted in lieu of a DD Form 149.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted and entered active duty for a period of 3 years on 13 March 1986. At the time of his enlistment he was 18 years old, with 12 years of formal education, one semester of college, and a GT (general technical) score of 91. Following successful completion of basic and advanced individual training he was assigned to Germany as a personnel administrator. He was promoted to pay grade E-4 in April 1987 and awarded an Army Achievement Medal.
In August 1988 the applicant was punished under Article 15 of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) for sleeping on duty and for being absent without leave. His punishment included extra duty, restriction, forfeiture, and reduction to pay grade E-1, which was suspended. The suspended reduction was vacated in January 1989.
In February 1989, after being charged with one count of receiving stolen property (which he knew had been stolen), one count of attempting to steal money from the bank account of another soldier, and six counts of stealing the property of another soldier, the applicant requested an administrative discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial. His request was denied.
The applicant was subsequently convicted by a general court-martial, in consonance with his plea, of the above listed charges. The court-martial order indicates that the applicant received an automatic teller card, belonging to another soldier, on 28 December 1988. The applicant then attempted to steal money from that account on 28 December 1988. He then stole between $300.00 and $340.00 dollars from the account on 28, 29, 30 and 31 December 1988 and on 1 and 2 January 1989. His sentence included a dishonorable discharge, confinement for 5 years (of which the convening authority approved only 27 months), and forfeiture of all pay and allowances. His dishonorable discharge was executed on 12 June 1990.
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. The applicant's discharge was accomplished in compliance with applicable laws and regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. While the Board has considered the applicant’s age at the time of his military service and his contention that he has had good post-service conduct, none of these factors, either individually or in sum, warrants the relief requested. Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant, when only 18/19 years old, successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and was promoted to pay grade E-4 with barely 1 year of active service.
3. The applicant has presented no compelling evidence that there were any mitigating factors that would excuse, or justify, his actions which resulted in conviction by a general court-martial.
4. 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 that requirement.
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
__AAO__ __LE____ __JTM __ DENY APPLICATION
INDEX
| CASE ID | AR2001062015 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011127 |
| 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. | 105.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
CG | BCMR | Retirement Cases | 2004-013
He stated that because he was honorably discharged and reenlisted on December 4, 1987, ten days before his court-martial, the Coast Guard lost the authority to court-martial him, and his case was “handed over to the federal court system.” The applicant also stated that upon reporting to the training center where he had worked on September 28, 1988—the day after his release from prison—he was advised to return home until discharged. The Coast Guard argued that the application was untimely.1...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040007877C070208
The applicant requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded. On 10 August 1989, he was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. There is no evidence in the applicant's service records and the applicant has provided no evidence that supports his contention that his commander made things hard for him in his company.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000014
On 17 January 1989, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and was advised of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the UCMJ, the possible effects of an under other than honorable conditions discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him. The applicant contends that he was unfairly charged and that based on his good post-service conduct he should receive an upgrade of his discharge. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070234C070402
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: APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017587
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 June 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140017587 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. 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. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-1998-00387-3
___________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: On 25 August 1998, the AFBCMR considered and denied the applicant’s request to upgrade his BCD to honorable. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the application, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit E. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Through counsel, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007976
The applicant did not provide any evidence. When authorized, it is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Therefore, clemency in the form of an honorable discharge or a general discharge is not warranted in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021979
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 June 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110021979 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The conviction and dishonorable discharge (not a bad conduct discharge) were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074109C070403
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. Beyond his self authored statement, he submits no evidence in support of his request. Additionally, his dishonorable discharge was ultimately upgraded, by the Army Clemency and Parole Board to a bad conduct discharge effective, 9 September 1997, and finally affirmed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007637
On 21 June 1990, a U.S. Army Court of Military Review noted that prior to his GCM, the applicant had been punished under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ for two of the many offenses for which he was convicted by court-martial; specifically Charges I and II. This form also shows his character of service as "Dishonorable." _______ _ X ______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military...