| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr. | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Member | |
| Mr. Charles Gainor | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to general.
APPLICANT STATES: That there are mitigating circumstances to his absences without leave (AWOLs). He invites attention to his civilian record and encloses court documentation to show that in July 1969 he was charged with attempted murder and two instances of felony assault with a deadly weapon. On 8 January 1970 he was convicted of three counts of felony assault likely to produce great bodily harm.
He also includes letters from his employer and three people who have known him for a long time. These letters are accepted as an implied argument that the applicant's post-service behavior and accomplishments warrant the requested relief.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicant was inducted on 7 January 1969, completed training with excellent conduct and efficiency ratings and was ordered to the Overseas Replacement Station, Oakland, California for transfer to Vietnam. However, he never departed for Vietnam. He was AWOL from 29 May to 22 July 1969 for which he was convicted by a summary court-martial. The sentenced confinement for 45 days was suspended and on 2 September 1969 the applicant was reported to be in the hands of civilian authorities in Santa Anita, California.
He was separated with an undesirable discharge on 1 December 1971 under the provisions Army Regulation 635-206. His SPN (separation program number) code, 284, means conviction by civil court or adjudged to be a juvenile offender during the current period of active duty. He had 8 months and 9 days of creditable service and 794 days lost time.
Army Regulation 635-206, then in effect, provided, in pertinent part, that an enlisted member who was convicted by a civilian court of an offense for which the authorized punishment under the UCMJ included confinement of 1 year or more was to be considered for elimination. The separation authority could waive a board of officers provided the individual concerned was physically in civil custody at the time. When such separation was warranted, an undesirable discharge was considered appropriate.
The applicant's employer writes that he is reliable and hard working. He is always on time and works well with others. A friend of more than 25 years writes that the applicant is reliable and trustworthy and that he carries himself with dignity and self-respect. A friend of more than 40 years writes that the applicant is a man of good standards within his family and the community. A minister writes that he has known the applicant at least 30 years and also states that he is a man of good standards within his family and the community.
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 the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The character of the discharge is commensurate with his overall record which was devoid of any redeeming service.
2. The applicant's commission of felonies, which apparently led to his discharge, does nothing to mitigate his AWOLs.
3. The evidence of support from his employer, minister and friends concerning his post service conduct is noted but these matters do not outweigh the offenses that led to his discharge or demonstrate an error or an injustice in the discharge. They are not so exceptionally meritorious as to warrant the requested relief.
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
__INW __ __WTM__ ___CG__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002072525 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20021003 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19711201 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-206 . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | A92.21 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019319
On 6 August 1970, the applicant's company commander recommended the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 for a civil conviction with an undesirable discharge. The regulation stated in: a. Paragraph 3-7a - an honorable discharge was a separation with honor. The applicant's record shows he was discharged in accordance with Army Regulation 635-206 for misconduct-conviction by civil authorities.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010028
While AWOL from Fort Ord, he was arrested and then convicted of robbery (2nd Class Felony) and sentenced to 5 years confinement. On 4 January 1978, the Army Discharge Review Board, under the Special Discharge Review Program (SDRP), denied the applicant's petition for an upgrade of his discharge. The U.S. Court of Appeals, observing that applicants to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) are by statute allowed 15 years to apply there, and that this Board's exhaustion requirement (Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011656C070208
His status was changed from AWOL to confinement by civil authorities on 1 August 1969. The applicant was 20 years old at the time of his conviction. The evidence available to the Board indicates the applicant was discharged as a result of his civil conviction.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040009110C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 August 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20040009110 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. James B. Gunlicks | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that, on 2 October 1974, he was discharged with...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020580
The applicant requests upgrade of his undesirable discharge to a general discharge. On 31 August 1972, the applicant, who was then in civilian confinement, was notified by his commander that he was being considered for elimination from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge - Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, AWOL, Desertion) due to conviction by a civilian court. b. Paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004104244C070208
The board determined the applicant was undesirable for further retention in the military because of a conviction by a civil court. The board recommended that the applicant be discharged from the service because of misconduct (conviction by civil court) with a UD. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that, on 30 September 1970, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, due to civil conviction.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012253
On 10 May 1973, the appropriate authority approved the recommendation for separation due to civil court conviction and directed that the applicant be issued an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. c. An individual discharged for conviction by a civil court normally was furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate, however, an honorable or General Discharge Certificate could be furnished if the individual being discharged had been awarded a personal decoration, or if warranted by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003735C070206
This form also shows that the applicant was held in civil confinement by the Texas Department of Correction from 7 April 1968 through 5 March 1970, the date of his discharge. On 16 February 1970, the separation authority directed that the applicant be discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, by reason of misconduct (civil conviction), and directed that the applicant receive an undesirable discharge. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000351
On 24 March 1969, the applicant's immediate commander recommended the applicant's discharge from military service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge-Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, AWOL, Desertion). On 26 March 1969, the separation authority approved the applicant's separation and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. b. Paragraph 3-7b states a general discharge is a separation from the Army...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029918
Special Orders Number 282, issued by the U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis, WA, on 9 October 1970 ordering his discharge from the Army effective 9 October 1970 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations Discharge Misconduct (Fraudulent Entry, Conviction by Civil Court, and Absence Without Leave or Desertion) by reason of conviction by civil court with an under other than honorable conditions discharge; and c. A duly-constituted DD Form 214 that shows he...