Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067817C070402
Original file (2002067817C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 7 March 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002067817

         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. Joseph A. Adriance Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. Chairperson
Mr. John P. Infante Member
Ms. Regan K. Smith 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: In effect, that the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) drug use conviction notice be removed from his records.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was never found guilty of drug use charges, never received nonjudicial punishment (NJP), never was reduced in rank, was never court-martialed, and the only action taken against him was that he attended an administrative separation board. In an additional statement he prepared for the Board, the applicant indicates that he needs to have the changes as soon as possible due to the fact that he will lose his job, which will cause irreparable harm to him and his family. He claims that the Commander’s Report of Disciplinary or Administrative Action (DA Form 4833) on file contains an erroneous guilty entry in the judicial findings portion of the form. He contends that this entry is untrue because he never accepted NJP or underwent a trial by court-martial. As a result, he claims this entry should be deleted and all appropriate corrections should be made to his military records and he requests that his application be expedited.

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

He entered the Army on 23 May 1984 and continuously served on active duty for 14 years, 10 months, and 17 days until 9 April 1999, at which time he received a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD), under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c(2) (Commission of a Serious Offense-Abuse of Illegal Drugs), Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of misconduct.

The evidence of record includes a Specimen Custody Document-Drug Testing (DD Form 2624), dated 19 October 1998, that confirms the applicant tested positive for THC (marijuana) and a law enforcement investigation established that the applicant had used marijuana sometime during the fall of 1998.

A Commander’s Report of Disciplinary or Administrative Action (DA Form 4833), dated 12 April 1999, prepared by the applicant’s unit commander is also on file and indicates that administrative action was taken against the applicant based on his wrongful use of marijuana. This report confirms that an administrative separation board was convened to consider separation of the applicant. The board recommended separation with a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD) and after the applicant unsuccessfully appealed the separation action, the board recommendation was approved and the applicant was separated with a GD.


The DA Form 4833 also clearly indicates that the action taken against the applicant was administrative in nature and the resultant action was an administrative discharge. However, it does contain an entry in the judicial findings portion of the report that gives the incorrect impression that there was a guilty judicial finding; however, this entry was not used as a basis for any further disciplinary or titling action.

Department of Defense Instructions (DODI) 5505.7 contains the authority and criteria for titling decisions. It states, in pertinent part, that titling only requires credible information that an offense may have been committed. It further indicates that regardless of the characterization of the offense as founded, unfounded, or insufficient evidence, the only way to administratively remove a titling action from the Defense Central Investigations Index (DCII) is to show either mistaken identity or a complete lack of credible evidence to dispute the initial titling determination.

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 Board notes the request of the applicant that the CID drug use conviction be removed from his records and the guilty judicial finding entry contained in the DA Form 4833 be deleted and his records corrected accordingly. However, the evidence of record confirms that a law enforcement investigation established that he used marijuana sometime in the sometime during the fall of 1998. An administrative separation board convened to consider his separation for this offense, it recommended that he be separated with a GD, and he was discharged accordingly in accordance with applicable regulations.

2. The Board does find that the guilty entry in the Judicial Findings portion of the
DA Form 4833, dated 12 April 1999, pertaining to the applicant is inappropriate; however, this error was harmless and did not result in a subsequent disciplinary or titling action. Therefore, while this will not result in his name being removed from law enforcement records that resulted from any titling action, the Board will direct an administrative correction be made to delete this entry from the DA Form 4833 in question.

3. DOD guidance specifies that to administratively remove a subject’s name from the DCII, mistaken identity or a complete lack of credible evidence to dispute the initial titling determination must be shown. Therefore, in view of the facts of this case, and the failure of the applicant to provide evidence that satisfies this burden of proof, the Board finds no basis for removing or amending any titling action that may have resulted from a CID investigation conducted on the applicant.

4. Although the applicant’s relief request is unclear, it appears he may be seeking to remove his name from the title block of the CID Report of Investigation (ROI) that resulted in his name being included in law enforcement records for this marijuana offence. If this is the case, he is advised that in order to address this issue he may request a copy and/or amendment of the CID Report of Investigation (ROI) through the United States Army Crime Records Center, United States Army Criminal Investigation Command, 6010 6th Street,
Fort Belvoir, Virginia. This is an administrative remedy option to which he is entitled, and that he may still wish to pursue.

5. 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.

6. 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.

NOTE: The Army Review Boards Agency, Support Division, St. Louis, will administratively correct the DA Form 4833, dated 12 April 1999, pertaining to the applicant, by inserting the document in the OMPF with a Memorandum for Record that amends the Judicial Findings Portion of the form by deleting the check mark contained in the Guilty box, thereby confirming that no judicial action was taken in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__RVO__ _ _JPI__ __RKS DENY APPLICATION




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


INDEX


CASE ID AR2002067817
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED 2002/03/07
TYPE OF DISCHARGE GD
DATE OF DISCHARGE 1999/04/09
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200
DISCHARGE REASON Misconduct-Abuse of illegal drugs
BOARD DECISION GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 267 123.0700
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.



Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013342

    Original file (20130013342.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that the Board overturn the denial decision by the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) to correct information in the CID files. The applicant states: a. The record he is appealing is a record of showing convictions, not titling.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130022391

    Original file (20130022391.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests Military Police Report (MPR) Number 01xxx-2008-MPCxxx be expunged from his records. The applicant states: * on 4 February 2013, he wrote the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC, referred to as CID), requesting to expunge a titling action from the Defense Central Index of Investigations (DCII) * the titling action involves a suspended violation of Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) * he was titled with impersonating a Department of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001697

    Original file (20130001697.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He humbly requests that the Army Board of Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) request that the CRC remove the record of NJP from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) data base. In his most humble opinion, he believes that the great burden on his own future legal career would be greatly reduced if he did not have to explain to civilian employers how he was never arrested or criminally charged with any crime; but yet, how a criminal record for possession of marijuana shows up on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014461

    Original file (20140014461.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests removal of his name from the title block of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) Report of Investigation (ROI) 08-CID446-XXXX4-6EX, dated 8 October 2008. Identifying information about the subject of a criminal investigation shall be removed from the title block of an ROI and the DCII if it is later determined a mistake was made at the time the titling and/or indexing occurred in that credible...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006577

    Original file (20120006577.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is also no DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)) contained in the AMHRR. Department of Defense Instruction 5505.7, 7 January 2003, Titling and Indexing of Subjects of Criminal Investigations in the Department of Defense, states that titling ensures investigators can retrieve information in an ROI of suspected criminal activity at some future time for law enforcement and security purposes. In view of the foregoing, there is...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130010852

    Original file (20130010852.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provided a memorandum from the CID dated 8 April 2013 that shows the CID partially granted the applicant's request for amendment of CID ROI Number 2011-CID122-xxxxx-xE. His request to remove his name from the ROI was denied. CID records are not State records;; they are Federal records.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007755

    Original file (20130007755.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was never charged with any crime and all flags on his record were removed upon a determination from a physician that the child in question had not been raped. Thus, when taken in its totality, the incongruence between the alleged dates and his deployment dates, the fact that the applicant had just divorced his first wife and she was not receiving benefits as a result of her own infidelity, and most obviously, the medical report indicating that no crime had taken place, all indicate that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005603C070206

    Original file (20050005603C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He is requesting, in effect, that the "Distribution" and "Possession" specifications be removed from the U. S. Army Criminal Investigation Command's (CID's) Report of Investigation (ROI). The applicant’s military records from his Regular Army service are not available to the Board. The DA Form 4833 he provided indicates he was given an Article 15 in May 1999 for the offenses of wrongful distribution of marijuana, wrongful possession of marijuana, and wrongful use of marijuana.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004856

    Original file (20090004856.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 16 December 1992, the convening authority approved the sentence and except for the bad conduct discharge, he ordered it executed. The Deputy SJA also stated that the decision to title the applicant for his role in the larceny offenses for which he was later court-martialed appears proper and that no action would be taken to amend the applicant's records and that if new and relevant information was available, the request to amend the ROI could be resubmitted. Accordingly, the CID titling...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012028

    Original file (20120012028.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests removal of his name from the title block of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) Report of Investigation (ROI) 0XXX-2XXX-CID-9XX-1XXX5-8EX, dated 17 September 2010, and removal of the associated officer evaluation report (OER) for the period ending 7 July 2010 from his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR), formerly known as the Official Military Personnel File. The first two command OER's were rendered by the brigade commander (rater), Colonel...