| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member | ||
| Mr. Harry Oberg | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his dishonorable discharge (DD) be upgraded.
APPLICANT STATES: The applicant has offered no argument or explanation with his application to support his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 25 June 1974, the applicant entered active duty in the Regular Army for
3 years. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 76Y (Supply Specialist). The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition, and it confirms that the highest rank he attained during his active duty tenure was specialist four/E-4 (SP4/E-4).
The applicant’s record also shows that he received non-judicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on the following three occasions for the offenses indicated: 24 October 1974, for being disrespectful towards a commissioned officer; 11 March 1975, for being absent from his appointed place of duty; and 25 May 1976, for failure to repair.
On 18 April 1977, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial (GCM) of attempted robbery and robbery. The resultant sentence included forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to pay grade E-1, confinement for 22 months, and a DD. On 17 May 1977, the convening authority approved the sentence with the modification that the confinement portion of the sentence in excess of
18 months be suspended. He further directed that pending completion of the appellate review, the applicant would be confined in the United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
On 31 January 1978, the United States Army Court of Military Review examined the applicant’s record of trial and found it to be legally sufficient to support the findings of guilty and the resultant sentence. The applicant petitioned for a grant of review in the United States Court of Military Appeals and on 12 May 1978, this petition was denied.
On 30 May 1978, the DD portion of the applicant’s sentence was ordered executed, and on 30 June 1978, he was discharged accordingly. At the time of his discharge, he had completed a total of 1 year, 11 months and 13 days of creditable active military service, and had accrued a total of 742 days of time lost, 671 days of which were subsequent to his normal expiration of term of service (ETS).
Title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552 as amended does not permit any redress by the Army Board of Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) of the finality of a court-martial conviction and empowers the ABCMR to only change a discharge if clemency is determined to be 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. By law, any redress by this Board of the finality of a court-martial conviction is prohibited. The Board is only empowered to change a discharge if clemency is determined to be appropriate to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. In this case, the Board finds that the applicant’s conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and that his trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses with which he was charged.
2. In addition, the Board finds that the type of discharge received by the applicant appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted and accurately reflects his overall record of service. Therefore, the Board concludes that clemency is not warranted in this case.
3. 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.
4. 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
__TSK__ __JTM__ __HBO___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002068597 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/11 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (DD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19780630 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Trial by Court-Martial, BCD |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 105.0100 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074480C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The convening authority did not agree with the recommendation of the investigating officer and directed that the applicant be tried by a general court-martial. Although his accomplice ended up with a less harsh sentence than he did, the applicant was granted an upgrade of his discharge from a BCD to a general discharge by the Army Clemency and Parole Board and he has not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023315
The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military records are satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016127
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. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001052763C070420
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: 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: Based on the seriousness of the offenses for which the applicant was convicted, the Board concludes that the resultant DD was an appropriate punishment and even after considering his overall record of service, the Board still concludes that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013686
- IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140013686 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. His service medical records were not available for review.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015348
The applicant requests his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded. 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 set aside a conviction. As a result, there is no evidentiary basis upon which to support the applicants request to upgrade his discharge at this time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068221C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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: However, in this case, the Board finds the evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070017328
On 12 June 1975, in a pretrial agreement, the applicant agreed to plead guilty to both charges provided that the convening authority approved a sentence of no more than a bad conduct discharge, confinement at hard labor for 2 years, total forfeitures and reduction to pay grade E-1; and that charge two which set forth other offenses was dismissed upon the court's acceptance of the applicant's guilty plea to the charges. On 14 August 1975, the Staff Judge Advocate, in a written review for the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110011457
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants 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 DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 11, as a result of court-martial with an under other than...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150002776
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 October 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150002776 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was convicted by a general court-martial and was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge. His discharge was affirmed and he was discharged accordingly on 3 June 1980.