| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Nancy L. Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Thomas A. Pagan | Member | ||
| Ms. Barbara J. Lutz | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to at least a general discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That his previous record up to the incident had been acceptable to the Army. He made restitution of all monies taken. Since his discharge his behavior has been good and he has not been in any trouble. As supporting evidence he provides a 22 January 1997 letter from the Department of Defense, Discharge Review Project Office, Office of the Naval Judge Advocate General. The letter stated that pursuant to a class action lawsuit and subsequent settlement agreement, discharge upgrades could be provided to a former service member if the member received a less than fully honorable administrative discharge while in the inactive reserve after 19 April 1971.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 October 1958.
The applicant's Restoration Action Record indicates he admitted to four Article 15 punishments for missing bed check.
On 26 February 1960, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial of going from his appointed place of duty without proper authority. He was sentenced to perform hard labor without confinement for 30 days and to forfeit $65.00 pay.
On 9 December 1960, the applicant was convicted pursuant to his plea by a general court-martial of stealing $150.00 U. S. dollars and about 660 Deutsche Marks of a value of about $157.14. (While participating in military maneuvers, an officer was captured by military intelligence agents. To make the mock capture more real, the agents confiscated the officer's personal property, including his wallet. The applicant drove the officer to an assembly point. Early the next day, the applicant found the wallet. He started to turn it in but finally kept it and the money it contained. Several days later he admitted taking the wallet and replaced the money he had spent.) His adjudged sentence was to be discharged with a dishonorable discharge, to be confined at hard labor for one year, to forfeit all pay and allowances, and to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. His approved sentence was to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge, to be confined at hard labor for 9 months, to forfeit all pay and allowances, and to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade.
On 16 March 1961, the Board of Review, Office of the Judge Advocate General affirmed the findings and sentence.
On 24 May 1961, the applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge pursuant to his sentence by court-martial.
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. It is noted that the applicant's record prior to the incident for which he was discharged included several instances of minor misconduct. It is noted that he made restitution of the money he had taken. However, the offense was serious and it appears that the approval authority considered the circumstances involved and his prior record when he reduced the applicant's adjudged sentence from a dishonorable discharge to a bad conduct discharge. The applicant's good post-service is commendable but that factor does not warrant granting additional clemency.
3. The supporting evidence provided by the applicant is not applicable to his case. It applied to soldiers who received an administrative discharge (he received a punitive discharge) while in the inactive reserve (he was in the Regular Army) after 19 April 1971 (he was discharged in 1961).
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
__KAK__ __TAP__ __BJL__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002075197 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/10/29 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 105.01 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087029C070212
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: The Board notes the applicant's contention that he was under extreme stress due to his house being robbed and his wife raped shortly before the incident for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066820C070402
On 28 July 1965, the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as provides for a dishonorable discharge, confinement at hard labor for 18 months and total forfeitures. Paragraph 1b of this regulation states that an enlisted person will be discharged with a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial imposing a bad conduct discharge. Therefore, the Board determined that there is no basis for upgrading the applicant’s bad...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709694C070209
On 23 July 1953, the suspended sentence was vacated. On 6 August 1953, the applicant was released from the Army with a bad conduct discharge There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge. Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board when it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709694
He was sentenced to receive a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, and to confinement at hard labor for 3 months. He regained his memory in the Temple City Jail on 5 July 1953. On 6 August 1953, the applicant was released from the Army with a bad conduct discharge
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710620
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he was not guilty of the offense for which he was charged, but his civilian attorney recommended that he “plead guilty since blacks did not fare well in cases like this.” COUNSEL CONTENDS : That the Board should grant clemency and change the discharge as requested by the applicant. His approved sentence was to receive a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be reduced to pay grade E-1 and to be confined at hard labor for 9 months. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9710620C070209
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was not guilty of the offense for which he was charged, but his civilian attorney recommended that he plead guilty since blacks did not fare well in cases like this. COUNSEL CONTENDS: That the Board should grant clemency and change the discharge as requested by the applicant. His approved sentence was to receive a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be reduced to pay grade E-1 and to be confined at hard labor for 9 months. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088676C070403
This certificate shows the same information; the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 February 1950 and was discharged with an Bad Conduct Discharge on 10 June 1952 in the rank of Private. Army Regulation 615-364, then in effect, provided the policy for discharge of enlisted personnel pursuant only to approved sentences of a general court-martial empowered to impose a dishonorable discharge. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record, the Board found no cause for clemency and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608465C070209
On 20 July 1959 the applicant was tried by general court-martial for four specifications of violation of Article 123 (two specifications of forgery and two specifications of uttering bad checks). He pleaded and was found guilty of all charges and specifications and was sentenced to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge, to forfeit $55.00 a month for 24 months, to be confined at hard labor for 24 months, and to be reduced to the lowest enlisted grade. DISCUSSION:...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006234
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 November 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140006234 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-204 (Personnel Separation - Dishonorable and Bad-Conduct Discharge), separation program number (SPN) 292 (discharge for other than by reason of desertion) as a result of court-martial with a bad conduct discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709619C070209
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 Board considered the...