| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
| Ms. Melinda M. Darby | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Roger W. Able | Member | |
| Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his dishonorable discharge (DD) be upgraded to honorable
APPLICANT STATES: That he “never did anything dishonorable on duty.” He “was a good soldier, 18 yrs. old, coerced into committing crime that was not of my doing.” He indicates he is the father of four and about to become a grandfather. That it has been 30 years since the snafu. He has had no legal problems since then. He is a good citizen.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was born on 5 November 1954.
On 21 July 1972, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for four years and a cash bonus. He completed his required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman). He was advanced to pay grade E-2 effective 21 November 1972.
On 19 December 1972, he was arrested in Los Angles, California for possession of marihuana. The disposition of the case is not in the available records.
On 10 April 1973, he was administered non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent without leave for the period 21 March to 9 April 1973. His punishment included a reduction to pay grade E-1 (suspended) and a forfeiture of pay (suspended).
On 10 August 1973, he was administered NJP for violation of a lawful general regulation by owning a vehicle with expired tags and parking in a loading zone. (His punishment included restriction (suspended), extra duty and a forfeiture of $25 pay.
On 24 September 1973, he was administered NJP for his failure to go to his appointed place of duty on 15 September 1973. His punishment was extra duty, restriction, a forfeiture of $71 pay (suspended) and a reduction to pay grade E-1 (suspended).
On 31 January 1974, he was convicted pursuant to his guilty peas by a General Court-Martial of possession of marihuana o/a 10 October 1973; possession of heroin o/a 21 October and 23 October 1973; and selling heroin o/a 21 and 23 October 1973. His sentence included a dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement at hard labor for 3 years and reduction to pay grade E-1.
On 23 December 1974, the United States Court of Military Appeals denied his petition for a grant of review.
On 13 January 1975, a physical examination cleared the applicant for discharge.
On 11 February 1975, he was dishonorably discharged as a result of his court-martial conviction. His separation document indicates he had 1 year, 2 months and 7 days of creditable service and 494 days of lost time.
On 3 December 1975, The Army Clemency and Parole Board remitted the unexecuted portion of the sentence to confinement and denied parole.
Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-7 provides that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the member's service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate.
The statutory authority under which this Board was created (Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, as amended) precludes any action by this Board, which would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.
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 offense charged and the applicant’s previous NJPs. 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 applicant’s contention that he was young and coerced into committing crime at the time is self-serving and is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.
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
_MMD____ _RWA____ __RWA___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002072445 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020820 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 144 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019444
The applicant served in Vietnam from on or about 14 July 1969 to 2 January 1971. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019417
The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to a general discharge (GD). On 2 September 1974, Headquarters, 1st Armored Division, issued Special Court-Martial Order Number 138, which shows he pleaded not guilty but was found guilty of: * assaulting a military policemen in the performance of his duty by striking him in the head with his shoe * attempting to steal stereo equipment from fellow Soldiers with a total value of about $350.00 * wrongfully entering a room,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706100C070209
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9706100
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 04100617C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant states, in effect, that he had "hidden mental problems." Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 24 July 1972; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 23 July 1975.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040002536C070208
The applicant’s disciplinary history includes his acceptance of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice UCMJ) on two separate occasions. On 13 June 1972, the applicant was separated with a BCD. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008665
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 January 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140008665 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. 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. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable...
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 | 20080008486
The applicant's military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 November 1967. In a letter, dated 24 April 1975, the applicant's commanding officer advised him that he intended to recommend him for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 by reason of conviction and sentence by a civil court, and that he may receive an undesirable discharge as a result of this action. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004121C070208
Lawrence Foster | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. At the time of the applicant's separation, a UD was appropriate.