| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his dishonorable discharge be upgraded to a more favorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his age, alcohol and drug abuse problems were not taken into consideration when his punishment was considered and that in light of his accomplishments and the adjustments he has made since, his discharge should be upgraded. He also states that his plea bargain agreement locked him into a dishonorable discharge. In support of his application, he submits a copy of a court order approving his name change, three course completion certificates and a copy of a college transcript.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in Houston, Texas, with parental consent on 4 December 1972, for a period of 2 years. He completed his basic training at Fort Polk, Louisiana, and was transferred to Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, to attend his advanced individual training (AIT).
On 2 April 1973, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for kicking another soldier in the face with his boot. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay.
He completed his AIT and received orders transferring him to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, with a report date of 30 April 1973. The applicant failed to report as ordered and was reported as absent without leave (AWOL) from 30 April until he was returned to military control on 22 May 1973. NJP was imposed against him for the AWOL offense on 15 June 1973 and his punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-1 (suspended for 3 months), a forfeiture of pay and extra duty for 30 days.
On 16 June 1973, he took an overdose of sinus pills (40 pills) in what was deemed a suicide attempt. A line of duty investigation was conducted and a finding of not in the line of duty was made.
On 11 March 1974, he was convicted by a general court-martial of assaulting another soldier with a deadly weapon by shooting at him with a pistol. He was sentenced, pursuant to a plea agreement, to be dishonorably discharged, to confinement at hard labor for 1 year and a forfeiture of all pay and allowances.
On 22 August 1974, as a result of consideration by the Army and Air Force Clemency and Parole Board, the applicant was denied restoration to duty but his sentence as pertained to confinement at hard labor was changed to remit any confinement in excess of 10 months. He was placed on excess leave pending the appellate review of his case.
On 6 November 1974, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence of the general court-martial convening authority, as modified by the Secretary of the Army (Remission of confinement in excess of 10 months).
Accordingly, he was dishonorably discharged pursuant to the sentence of a general court-martial on 4 February 1975. He had served 1 year, 1 month and 26 days of total active service and had 365 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.
A review of the available records shows that the applicant was initially charged with attempted murder because he was high on drugs at the time he discharged his firearm at another soldier. The bullet did not strike the soldier but went through his coat. A mis-trial was declared and the applicant agreed to plead guilty to a lesser charge of assault because he had no intention of hurting anyone. While not in his records, they indicate that NJP was imposed against him on three occasions, one for assault and two for AWOL.
Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, provides, in pertinent part, that the Board is not empowered to set aside a 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. Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged. 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.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore appear to be appropriate considering the available facts of the case.
3. The applicant’s contentions and supporting documents have been noted by the Board. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to the seriousness of his offense and his overall undistinguished record of service.
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
___dh___ ___fe ___ ___mm__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002070692 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/07/16 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | DD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1975/02/04 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | GCM |
| DISCHARGE REASON | GCM |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 675 | 144.6800/A68.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000625C070206
When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Although the applicant contends that his record of nonjudicial punishments indicate only minor offenses, evidence of record shows nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him on six occasions for various infractions which include larceny and assault. The applicant’s record of service included six nonjudicial punishments, two special...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005675C070205
On 29 May 1975, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) denied the applicant’s request for a discharge upgrade. Chapter 11 of this regulation, in effect at the time, states that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The applicant’s record of service included one nonjudicial punishment, two special court-martial convictions, and 217 days of lost time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022821
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 July 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120022821 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016542
The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general under honorable conditions discharge. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The applicant contends he was court-martialed and discharged at the end of his 2-year enlistment despite his good military record prior to the charges of drug possession.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080009308
The applicant's military service records contain a DD Form 214 that shows the applicant entered active duty this period on 31 March 1981 and was discharged on 7 February 1986. The evidence of record shows that the applicant initially served on active duty in the RA from 5 January 1973 through 16 December 1974 and that this period of honorable active duty service is documented in his military service records in the form of a DD Form 214, with an effective date of 16 December 1974. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001066187C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The ADRB denied his request on 7 November 1974. Chapter 10 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011179C070205
He was transferred to the United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, to serve his confinement. Nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him for that offense. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that Board’s 15-year statute of limitations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007413
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 August 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080007413 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. United States Army Court of Military Review, dated 29 July 1976, shows that the findings of guilty were affirmed but the court affirmed only so much of the approved sentence as provides for a bad conduct discharge and confinement for 30 days. __________X____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020038
BOARD DATE: 8 February 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100020038 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. His DD Form 214 for this period of service shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 11, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) as a result of court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010727C080407
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. On 7 May 1973, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The evidence of record does show that he departed AWOL from his unit while still in training without ever attempting to discuss his situation with members of his chain of command.