| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Judy Blanchard-Miller | Analyst |
| Ms. Celia L. Adolphi | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | ||
| Mr. John T. Meixell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he did nothing against anyone or anything that was related to the Army. His discharge was a civil conviction due to his introduction to drugs while in the Army. He believes, that if he had not entered the army, he would not have become addicted to drugs and would not have committed the felony, which lead to his civil arrest and conviction.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 28 February 1974, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. His military occupational specialty was 52BB10 (Power Generator Equipment Operator/Mechanic). The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-2.
On 20 August 1974, the applicant was tried and convicted by a civil court of robbery. The applicant was sentenced to 4 years in civil confinement.
On 5 September 1975, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to a conviction by a civil court. The applicant was advised by legal counsel of the basis for the contemplated separation action and the rights available to him. The applicant waived consideration of his case by a board of officers. He waived representation by an appointed counsel and acknowledged that he understood the effects of an undesirable discharge.
On 17 October 1975, the Commanding General approved the recommendation, reduced the applicant to the lowest enlistment grade and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 30 January 1976, the applicant was discharged in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, by reason of misconduct-conviction or adjudged a juvenile offender by a civil court, with a UD. He had completed 5 months and 22 days of creditable active service and 529 days of time lost.
Army Regulation 635-206, then in effect, provided, in pertinent part, that an individual will be considered for discharge when an individual is initially convicted by civil authorities of an offense which involves moral turpitude, regardless of the sentence received or maximum punishment permissible under any code. However, at the time of the applicant’s separation the regulation provided for the issuance of a UD.
On 27 June 1984, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.
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. 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.
2. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with the applicant’s overall record of military service.
3. The applicant's contentions have been noted by this Board. However, in considering the seriousness of the offense, which led to the applicant’s elimination from service, the Board did not find mitigation of this nature sufficient to override the very serious offense for which he was found guilty by civil authorities.
4. Therefore, the type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
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
__CLA__ ___MHM___ __JTM__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002071382 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/09/05 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (UD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1976/01/30 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-206 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A60.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 144.600 | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068905C070402
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 3 October 1975, the commander notified the applicant that he was being recommended for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to a conviction by a civil court and that he be required...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084226C070212
On 12 April 1976, the applicant's commander submitted a request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to conviction by civil authorities. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, for misconduct – conviction by civil authorities. There is no indication in the available records to show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088119C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to a more favorable discharge. On 10 July 1975, the applicant acknowledged that he had been advised that he was being recommended for separation from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to his conviction by civil authorities.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014826C070206
On 17 June 1975, the applicant’s unit commander submitted a recommendation for the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of paragraph 33a of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations), by reason of civil conviction. The applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 21 December 1976 under the provision of section VI of Army Regulation 635-206, by reason of civil conviction. There is no evidence that the applicant applied for the Army Discharge Review Board for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | AR20050014849C070206
He also states that he told his commander that all he wanted was to get treatment and carry on with his duties but his commander did not want to hear that. He applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) on 21 July 1977 for an upgrade of his discharge and contended at that time that it was unjust for the Army to discharge him for a civilian offense, because he was serving time for that offense at that time. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053812C070420
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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. Under this proclamation, eligible deserters were given the opportunity to request discharge, for the good of the service, with the understanding that they...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073963C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 20 February 1975, the unit commander advised the applicant that he was being considered for separation from the Army under Army Regulation 635-206, based on his conviction by civil authorities. On 20 March 1975, the commander recommended the applicant’s discharge under Army Regulation 635-206.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003099
On 31 March 1975, the applicant was advised in writing of being recommended for elimination from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct) due to his conviction by civil authorities on the charge of robbery. Item 44 (Time Lost Under Section 972, Title 10, U.S. Code (USC) and Subsequent to Normal Date of Expiration of Term of Service) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the following: * AWOL 11 March...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002700
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded to a general discharge and a personal appearance before the Board with counsel provided. The evidence of record shows that the applicant was recommended for discharge by reason of civil conviction.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20120000505
On 8 March 1972, he was awarded the Purple Heart for wounds received in action on 3 March 1972. His records contain a DD Form 214 which shows he was discharged in pay grade E-1 on 8 June 1976 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. On 7 March 1984, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge.