| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin | Member | |
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge be upgraded to something other than dishonorable.
APPLICANT STATES: That he entered the Army at age 17. He was reassigned to Germany where he fell in with a crowd of young men who were not of the best of character. He admits to committing all the acts for which he was convicted by a general court-martial; however, it was not his fault or he was not involved in the actual incidents. He provides a comprehensive account of his life and problems after the Army. He wishes to regain his rights as a reputable citizen and have this black mark off his record. He provides a separate statement and copies of military documents, which are a part of his military records, and certificates from his post-service era showing he attained his high school equivalency certificate, that he completed the entry level Tractor-Trailer Truck Driver Training Program, and a 2 hour Asbestos Awareness Course.
The applicant asserts that he merits clemency not only because his offenses were not so grave as to warrant a Dishonorable Discharge (DD), but also because he has been a good citizen in the 40 years since his conviction.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military records show:
On 9 August 1960, the applicant enlisted in the Army, at age 17. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 640 (Light Vehicle Driver). During his service, he also served as a Light Weapons Infantryman, MOS 111.
The record shows he was administered nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on three occasions for dereliction of duty, missing bed check and his failure to comply with a general order. The documentation is not in the available records.
On 18 April 1962, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of the illegal possession of a switchblade knife. His approved sentence was a reduction and forfeiture.
On 20 November 1962, in consonance with his plea, he was convicted by a General Court-Martial (GCM) of larceny of one pistol belt, valued about $1.20, one canteen with canteen cup and cover, valued about $1.92, one magazine pouch, valued about $1.65, one first aid pouch, valued about $.33, of a total of about $5.10, the property of a senior noncommissioned officer (NCO) of breaking restriction to the company area and the mess hall at about 0001 hours,
3 September 1962; and of disrespect in language to a superior NCO by saying to him “don’t put your hands on me. I am not like the others around here, I will fight you,” or words to that effect; of being absent without leave from 0001,
3 September to 0115 hours, 9 September 1962 and 2040 hours, 11 September to 0200 hours, 16 September 1962; and for assaulting a civilian on or about
15 September 1962 by hitting him about the head and body with his fists and by striking him about the head and body with a means likely to product grievous bodily harm, to wit: a pair of metal hand knuckles. It is also relevant that the applicant was convicted of assaulting a 55-year old German national, together with two other soldiers. Contrary to the applicant’s statements, the evidence at trial demonstrated that the applicant was the primary assailant, using aluminum knuckles that produced several gashes and bruises on the victim’s head, arms, and legs. His sentence was a DD, two years confinement, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and reduction to the lowest enlisted pay grade.
On 16 December 1962, the sentence was approved.
On 18 January 1963, the Board of Review, United States Army, affirmed the findings and sentence.
On 27 March 1963, the United States Court of Military Appeals denied the applicant’s Petition for Grant of Review.
On 6 May 1963, a physical examination cleared him for separation
On 11 May 1963, he was dishonorably discharged based on the results of a court-martial. His separation document indicates he had 2 years, 2 months and 10 days of creditable service and 204 days of lost time.
On 22 November 1963, he was released from confinement and placed on parole.
The statutory authority under which this Board was created (Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, as amended) precludes any action by this Board, which would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction. Rather it is only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process and then only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed.
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 gravity of the offenses warranted trial by GCM. His 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. His statement and evidence concerning his post service conduct have been noted, however, they do not sufficiently convince the Board that he is entitled to an upgrade of his discharge.
2. The Board notes the applicant was almost 19 years of age at the time of his first court-martial and over 19 when he was convicted by the GCM.
3. The Board also notes his record of post-service achievements; however, they are not sufficiently mitigating to overcome his undistinguished record of service or to warrant any upgrade of his discharge.
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, unjust or that clemency is appropriate. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this 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
_sac_____ _jtm_____ _kwl___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001063281 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020507 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080446C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 19 July 1963, the Board of Review, United States Army reviewed the applicant’s case, and it held that the findings of guilty and the sentence as approved by the convening authority were correct in law and fact.
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 | CY2015 | 20150002904
His records contain his DA Form 24 (Service Record). He was given a dishonorable discharge pursuant to a general court-martial empowered to adjudge such a discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073879C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 14 October 1963, the applicant was ordered to appear before a board of officers to be convened on 30 October 1963 to determine if he should be discharged from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-208. The Board noted the applicant’s letter and other complimentary letters of support which the applicant submitted with his application; however, these...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084737C070212
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 | CY2009 | 20090000027
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant's military personnel records contain a DD Form 214, which shows he was discharged on 10 July 1963 with a BCD as a result of court-martial. He completed a total of 1 year, 4 months, and 26 days of military service.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018573
The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general discharge (GD) under honorable conditions. 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. The applicant's military record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 13 November 1961.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072238C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Army Regulation 635-204, then in effect, directed that an enlisted person would be discharged with a DD pursuant only to an approved sentence of a GCM. In accordance with Title 10, United States code, Section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to change a discharge due to matters which
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03339
He was sentenced to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRS was unable to determine the propriety of the discharge based on the lack of documentation in the master personnel records. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006234
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 November 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140006234 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-204 (Personnel Separation - Dishonorable and Bad-Conduct Discharge), separation program number (SPN) 292 (discharge for other than by reason of desertion) as a result of court-martial with a bad conduct discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable...