| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Rosa M. Chandler | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Thomas B. Redfern, III | Member | |
| Ms. Mae M. Bullock | Member |
2. The applicant requests, in effect, that he receive back pay for his period of incarceration at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.
3. The applicant states that he was incarcerated from February 1981 to May 1982 when his conviction was overturned. He adds that he was supposed to be retried, but instead all charges were dismissed and he was fully restored to duty. He contends that he was supposed to receive all back pay and allowances, plus $75.00 per day for the length of his incarceration. He said he did receive two payments of $1,500, but believes he is due more.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) for 3 years on 25 September 1979. Upon completion of all required training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13B (Cannon Crewmember). On 13 January 1980, he was assigned for duty with C Battery, 1st Battalion, 2nd Field Artillery, Germany. On 25 September 1980, he was advanced to private first class, pay grade E-3. This was the highest pay grade that he achieved.
5. On 21 January 1981, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), was imposed against the applicant for failure to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed 16 January 1981. His punishment included reduction from pay grade E-3 to pay grade E-2, and forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 1 month.
6. The available record does not contain the initial court martial conviction order. However, General Court-Martial (GCM) Order Number 444, dated 19 June 1981, Headquarters, United States Disciplinary Barracks (USDB), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, shows that the applicant's sentence as related to forfeiture of all pay and allowances promulgated in GCM Order Number 23, Headquarters, 8th Infantry Division, dated 30 April 1981, was suspended contingent upon the applicant's continued satisfactory performance of duty with the Food Service Division, USDB, or elsewhere as assigned, and contingent upon his not violating the rules of the USDB or the Uniform Code of Military Justice until such time as the sentence was ordered into execution or remitted.
7. GCM Order Number 434, US Army Combined Arms Center, Fort Leavenworth, dated 5 November 1982, reflects that the applicant was then assigned to the Correctional Holding Detachment, USDB, Fort Leavenworth, and states that the findings of guilty and the sentence as promulgated in GCM Order 23, dated 30 April 1981, were set aside on 30 April 1982 by the US Court of Military Review and a rehearing authorized. A rehearing was determined not to be practicable, therefore, the charges were dismissed. All rights and privileges, and property of which the applicant was deprived by virtue of the findings of guilty were restored.
8. All of the applicant's pay records covering his period of service between February 1981-November 1982 are also not available. The applicant's Leave and Earning Statement (LES) for 1-30 April 1981 shows he received $123.37 at the end of that month. His LES's between May and October 1981 show that he received no pay for those months. Item 39 (Remarks) shows "Member removed for early separation 30 April 1981." A military pay voucher, dated stamped 24 November 1982, shows the applicant received 749.72 for the period 1-12 November 1982. No additional pay records are available.
9. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that, on 12 November 1982, he was honorably separated as a result of court-martial. He had completed 3 years, 1 month and 18 days of creditable active military service and he had no recorded lost time. His DD Form 214 shows that he was retained in an active duty status 49 days beyond his normal end term of service (ETS) date for the convenience of the government.
10. On 19 October 1987, the applicant was issued a DD Form 215 (Correction to 214) to show that he was separated under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-200, due to the expiration of his term of service.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence available indicates that effective 30 April 1982, the applicant's sentence was set aside and the charges were dismissed. All rights, privileges and property of which the applicant was deprived as a result of the guilty verdict and sentence were restored.
2. Based upon the actions of the Court of Military Review, the applicant should have received all pay and allowances previously withheld by virtue of forfeiture as a result of his court-martial conviction. It is unclear whether he received such monies; LES's for May-October 1981 show that he received no pay during that period. The applicant does make mention of receiving two payments of $1,500 each, however there is no record of such payments.
3. There is no evidence to indicate that the applicant served in a no-pay status between 30 April 1981 and 12 November 1982.
4. There is also no evidence to indicate that the applicant is entitled to receive $75.00 per day, in addition to his regular pay, during his period of incarceration.
5. The Board believes the applicant's military pay records should be reviewed to determine whether he is due any back pay and allowances as a result of the dismissed charges. If so, he should be paid the appropriate amount.
6. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That the Defense Finance and Accounting Service review all records related to this case and, if appropriate, pay the individual concerned any amount that he may be due.
2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.
BOARD VOTE:
__aao___ __tbr___ __mmb___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
Arthur A. Omartian
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2002081278 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20030807 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19821112 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Chap 4 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (GRANT) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 120.0200 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130013627
Pursuant to Court-Martial Convening Order Number 3, Headquarters, Combined Arms Center, Fort Leavenworth, KS, dated 24 April 209, as amended by General Court-Martial Order Number 5, dated 17 July 2009, as amended by General Court-Martial Order Number 7, dated 14 August 2009, as amended by General Court-Martial Orders Number 1, dated 1 February 2010, a rehearing on sentence only was ordered. On 10 November 2010, the convening authority approved the sentence and except for the portion of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007850
The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded. The case was remanded back to the ACMR, and on 31 July 1987 the ACMR set aside the finding of guilty and the sentence on the remaining court-marital charge of stealing the submachine gun and authorized a rehearing on the larceny and wrongful disposition charges. Notwithstanding counsel's contention that there were no court-martial charges pending against the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000937
The applicant provides copies of two Certificates of Achievement for completing the requirements for the Pathfinder Professional Badge, a request indicating that he was a member of the European Karate Championship Team, a certificate indicating he had completed the 7th STEP FOUNDATION History and Training at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and a certificate indicating that he had completed the United States Disciplinary Barracks (USDB) Restoration Unit training. The applicant contends, in effect,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015813
In his request for discharge, he indicated he understood that by requesting discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charge against him or of a lesser included offense that also authorized the imposition of a discharge under other than honorable conditions. On 29 September 1982, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028323
The applicant provides: * a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period 1 April 1981 to 3 October 1983 showing he was honorably released from active duty [Item 18 (Remarks) shows the DD Form 214 was administratively issued on 28 May 2003] * a DD Form 214 for the period 28 June 1977 to 2 May 2003 showing he was discharged due to court-martial, other CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012064
The separation authority could issue an honorable discharge (HD) or GD if warranted by the member's overall record of service. However, the evidence of record confirms the applicant was appropriately convicted by a GCM for the AWOL offense he committed that was reviewed through several appellate processes. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100012064 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100012064 2 ARMY BOARD FOR...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010668
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 December 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110010668 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant contends that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions, because there were a lot of errors in the court-martial and that the charges were going to be dropped and everything reinstated. The evidence clearly shows that after the applicant's court-martial was remanded, he admitted his guilt and requested to be discharged in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008170C070208
This action was in accordance with Article 71b, UCMJ (Title 10 U.S. Code 871); (e) The applicant’s application contains no evidence that he had requested voluntary excess leave as stated on his DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), block 6; and (f) The applicant’s application included a two-page memorandum requesting a waiver to Army Regulation 190-47. While the REFRAD order was not a discharge or dismissal, it had the effect of preventing him from going on appellate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023714
The U.S. Army Board of Review, on 1 April 1969: a. found no error in not trying the applicant for all known offenses, including offenses committed only two days before the trial; b. there was no error in joining minor offenses (the short AWOLs) and serious charges (the larceny and extortion), even though they were unrelated; c. there was no error in rehearing the charges from the previously disapproved SPCM; d. there was no error in the staff judge advocate's failing to inform the convening...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078283C070215
The prosecution presented evidence showing that the two Vietnamese youths were in a tent talking with two American soldiers, Private First Class (PFC) P____ and PFC J____ when the applicant came in to get his gear. • A family friend writes that she has known the applicant for 25 years. The applicant is always available to help anyone who needs help.