| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | |
| Ms. Shirley L. Powell | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that she has been a good citizen since her discharge and desires to have her records cleared for future references. She also states that she had her husband's permission to sign his unemployment checks.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She enlisted on 10 November 1987 for a period of 4 years and training as a dental specialist. She completed her training and was transferred to Fort Eustis, Virginia, where she was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 January 1990. She remained at Fort Eustis until she was transferred to Alaska on 26 January 1993.
On 7 June 1993, the applicant submitted a request for early return of her dependent husband from Fort Greely, Alaska to Panama City, Panama.
On 2 July 1993, her dependent husband applied for unemployment benefits from the State of Alaska.
Meanwhile, on 6 July 1993, orders were published which authorized travel for her dependent husband to Panama on 7 July 1993.
On 31 January 1994, the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) office at Fort Greely was notified by an investigator at the Alaska Department of Labor that the applicant had illegally received unemployment checks intended for her husband in the amount of $2,160.00. The checks covered the periods from 17 July through 7 September 1993 and 28 September through 18 December 1993, in the amount of $108.00 per week. A CID investigation was conducted which established probable cause to believe that the applicant had committed the offenses of forgery, larceny, conspiracy and making false official statements, when she submitted fraudulent unemployment claims to the Alaska State Department of Labor.
On 26 May 1994, an investigation was conducted under Article 32, Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), which concluded that the applicant had filed unemployment claims for her husband, who had departed Alaska after filing an initial claim, that she had continued to file the claims and receive the checks, that she had forged her husband's signature to cash the checks, that she had solicited another to forge her husband's signature on one of the checks, that she had established a telephone bill (debt) of $2,700 and the company had terminated her service. She then used her sister's name to re-establish telephone service and became delinquent in that bill in the amount of about $1,000. The investigating officer recommended trial by a general court-martial.
On 18 September 1994, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of larceny of property of a value of more than $100.00 during the period of July to December 1993, obtaining services under false pretenses of a value of more than $100.00 between September and October 1993, and of solicitation to commit forgery. She was sentenced to confinement for 90 days, forfeiture of all pay and allowances and a BCD.
On 30 April 1996, the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals (USACCA) affirmed the findings and sentence of the general court-martial.
On 12 September 1996, the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces denied the applicant's petition for a grant of review of the decision of the USACCA.
Accordingly, she was discharged with a BCD on 26 February 1997, pursuant to a duly reviewed and affirmed court-martial conviction. She had served 9 years, 2 months and 26 days of total active service and had 73 days of lost time due to confinement.
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 Board has noted the applicant's contention that she had her husband's permission to sign the checks for which she was convicted and finds it to be without merit. Having permission to sign checks that were knowingly obtained through fraudulent acts does not diminish the severity of the crime and is no less serious than not having permission. Having permission from her husbands lends only to incriminate him in the crime as an accessory.
4. However, the evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant continued to make fraudulent applications for benefits which she knew that she nor her husband were entitled to receive, within weeks of his departure from Alaska.
5. 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.
6. 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
_slp ____ ___sac __ ___tmc__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002079827 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/03/11 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | BCD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1997/02/26 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | BCD |
| DISCHARGE REASON | GCM |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 675 | 144.6800/A68.00/BCD |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017114
The applicant's records contain the following: a. On 21 April 1998, the applicant's commander initiated action to separate the applicant for fraudulent entry under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Separation), paragraph 7-17a, due to the applicant's deliberate material misrepresentation, omission, or concealment of information, which included concealment of arrests and convictions by civil courts. Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054223C070420
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 evidence of record disclosed that the applicant rendered a sworn statement and an affidavit, both of which he knew to be false, indicating that a fraud investigator from MBNA America...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017438C070206
The applicant requests to present his case before a formal panel of the Board. The applicant states his command did not take into consideration his nearly eight years of honorable service. Pursuant to Article 66(b), UCMJ, the record of trial was referred to the United States Army Court of Military Review (ACMR).
Applicant alleges that her signature on AF Form 694, “Data for Payment of Retired Air Force Personnel,” the concurrence portion for an SBP election concurring with less than full spouse SBP coverage, is forged. Although it is unfortunate there is no original document for comparison with regard to the applicant’s signature, we found no persuasive evidence that she did not sign the document at the time of her late husband’s retirement which appears to be properly witnessed. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012843
The applicant provides a DD Form 2656-2, dated 19 January 2007, which shows the FSM elected to terminate the SBP. Section IV (Spouse Concurrence) of this form shows a signature of the applicant's same name concurring with the FSM's election. The ABCMR does not investigate cases, but relies upon the evidence in the FSM's record and that provided by applicants.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006720
NJP may be imposed to correct, educate, and reform offenders who the imposing commander determines cannot benefit from less stringent measures; to preserve a Soldiers record of service from unnecessary stigma by record of court-martial conviction; and to further military efficiency by disposing of minor offenses in a manner requiring less time and personnel than trial by court-martial: a. Paragraph 3-6 addresses the filing of an NJP and provides, in pertinent part, that a commanders...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00319
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states the applicant submitted a notarized letter alleging the signature on the copy of an AF Form 1267, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Notification and Concurrence, is not her signature and that she did sign an SBP election form for annuity for 55 percent of the servicemember’s retired pay. If the servicemember had elected full spouse coverage, the applicant’s signature would not have been...
She further asserts that, to date, the Air Force is unable to validate any of the documentation used to deny her an entitlement to SBP. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010447
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 October 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060010447 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. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted. The applicant's entire record of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086153C070212
The applicant requests that his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to fully honorable. He is willing to rejoin the military to get his discharge upgraded. Without evidence to show that an error was made in his court-martial, or that the applicant’s post-service accomplishments are so meritorious as to warrant upgrading a properly issued discharge, there is insufficient basis in which to recommend approval of his request.