| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deyon D. Battle | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable or a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he has contended from the start that he was railroaded. He states that he was told that he would only get probation; however, he was sentenced to time in jail.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 22 April 1971, he enlisted in the Army for 3 years in the pay grade of E-1. He successfully completed his training as a combat engineer.
His conduct and efficiency ratings were excellent throughout his enlistment until 10 December 1971, when he received an unsatisfactory conduct rating and a good efficiency rating.
On 31 July 1972, while assigned to Fort Kobbe, Canal Zone, he was arrested and placed in pretrial confinement. He was charged by civil authorities with two counts of distribution of cocaine. After consulting with counsel, he plead guilty, and was sentenced to 3 years on each count. A 3-year special parole term was also ordered. Sentenced was adjudged on 5 January 1973.
On 6 February 1973, the applicant was notified that a board of officers was to be convened to accomplish his separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, as a result of a civil court conviction. In the notification, the applicant was informed that he may receive an undesirable discharge, which would make him ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws and that he could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.
He acknowledged receipt of the notification on 7 March 1973, and indicated that he wished to be represented by counsel during the hearing. Accordingly, a board of officers convened on 7 September 1973, and the applicant was represented by counsel. The board found that the applicant was undesirable for further retention in the military service based on his conviction by civil court and because he was convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude. The board recommended that he be discharged and that his service be characterized as undesirable.
The convening authority approved the recommendation for discharge as recommended by the board of officers. Accordingly, on 8 October 1973, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, based on misconduct as a result of a conviction by civil court. He had completed 1 year, 7 months and 14 days of total active service and he had 303 days of lost time due to confinement. He was furnished an undesirable discharge.
Army Regulation 635-206, then in effect, outlined the conditions and procedures for the discharge of enlisted personnel for misconduct. Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, convictions by civil authorities, desertion or absence without leave. An undesirable discharge was considered appropriate.
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 administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to jeopardize his rights.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request. Likewise, there is no evidence to support his contentions that he was railroaded or that probation would be his only punishment.
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 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
___mdm _ ___kak__ ___tl ___ DENY APPLICATION
Carl W. S. Chun
Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records
| CASE ID | AR2002067021 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/04/23 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1973/10/08 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR |
| DISCHARGE REASON | AR 635-206 |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 626 | 144.6000 |
| 2. 627 | 144.6100 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014928
The punishment included a reduction to sergeant, pay grade E5, forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months (suspended), and 14 days extra duty. He stated that upon his arrival to Fort Carson he received $220.00 in July 1972; no pay in August or September 1972; $9.00 in October; and about $25.00 in the months of November and December 1972. On 31 October 1973, the board of officers recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service and issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012623
The applicant requests his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. On 26 February 1971, he was arrested by the Union Lake, MI, police for the civil offenses of "minor in possession" and "breaking and entering" and on 5 April 1971 subsequent to a guilty plea, he was sentenced to probation for 1 year from 5 April 1971 with the conditions that he not leave the State without court permission, report monthly to his probation officer, not engage in antisocial misconduct, and not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024917
On 1 July 1975, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation that the applicant be discharged from the service because of conviction by a civil court under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 and directed that the applicant be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. Based on the foregoing, there is an insufficient basis to upgrade the applicant's discharge to an honorable discharge or to a general discharge under honorable conditions. _______ _ _x______...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009011
The applicant states he completed basic combat and advanced individual training as well as 12 months of service in Vietnam despite his lost time. His DD Form 214 confirms he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 by reason of misconduct - conviction by civil court with an under other than honorable conditions character of service and issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. The evidence of record shows he was convicted by a civil court for armed robbery, an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005197
On 15 May 1973, the applicants immediate commander initiated separation action against him in accordance with Army Regulation 635-206 for misconduct, conviction by civil court. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002083322C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 6 May 1973 the applicant again went AWOL. Army Regulation 635-206, then in effect, provided, in pertinent part, that an enlisted member who was convicted by a civilian court of an offense for which the authorized punishment under the UCMJ included confinement of 1 year or more was to be considered for elimination.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084910C070212
The applicant submitted a copy of the letter he wrote to his Member of Congress (MOC) asking him to intervene and a number of other documents including a copy of his DD Form 214, Report of Transfer or Discharge, a Standard Form (SF) 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, which shows that he reported to a Troop Medical Clinic (TMC) representative that he suspected he had Hepatitis; a SF 89, Report of Medical Examination, and a SF 93, Report of Medical History, both dated 21 November 1972,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067631C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 27 March 1975, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 for civil conviction with an undesirable discharge. There is no evidence of record to show he was wounded in action.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140005061
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 October 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140005061 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. After reviewing the facts of his case the board found that he should be discharged for misconduct and recommended that he be issued an undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, states a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080018669
The equivalent crimes and their maximum punishment under the Table of Maximum Punishments of The Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 1969 (Revised edition) provided the following: Article 129, Burglary - dishonorable discharge, reduction to lowest enlisted grade, a forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and 10 years of confinement; 12. The evidence shows that the applicant twice accepted NJP under Article 15 of the UCMJ, and that he was absent in desertion when he was convicted by a...