Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03093380C070212
Original file (03093380C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied




RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 04 MARCH 2004
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003093380


         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Kathleen A. Newman Chairperson
Mr. Kenneth L. Wright Member
Mr. Eric N. Andersen Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:


1. The applicant requests that his under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to honorable.

2. The applicant states that he has been drug free for over 18 years. He has a 12-year-old son and would like to set a good example. He wants to be a good role model for him and wants to ensure that he does not use drugs.

3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant enlisted in the Army for 3 years on 2 February 1979, completed training, and in September 1979 was assigned to Fort Lewis, Washington as a scout driver. In April 1981 he was promoted to pay grade E-4.
On 12 August 1981 he reenlisted in the Army for 4 years.

2. On 18 May 1982 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for wrongfully possessing and using marijuana. He was reduced to pay grade E-3.

3. In January 1983 the applicant was assigned to an infantry battalion in Germany. On 1 May 1983 he was again promoted to pay grade E-4.

4. A CID (Criminal Investigation Division) report of 18 August 1983 shows that the applicant was apprehended for possessing hashish. On that date the applicant made a sworn statement to the effect that approximately two grams of hashish was found on his person, that he attempted to sell hashish to another Soldier, and that he himself smoked some hashish.

5. On 20 October 1983 the applicant received nonjudicial punishment for wrongfully possessing marijuana in the hashish form, for wrongfully attempting to distribute the drug, and for wrongfully using the marijuana.

6. On 14 November 1983 the applicant's commanding officer notified the applicant that he was initiating action to discharge him for misconduct.

7. The applicant consulted with counsel and stated that he had been advised of the basis for the contemplated action, its effects, of the rights available to him, and the effect of any action taken by him in waiving his rights. He waived consideration of his case by a board of officers. He stated that he understood the nature and consequences of the general discharge under honorable conditions that he might receive. He declined to submit a statement in his own behalf.

8. The applicant's commanding officer recommended to the separation authority that the applicant be discharged from the Army. That officer indicated that the applicant had been counseled on numerous occasions, and that he would not develop sufficiently to participate satisfactorily in training or become a satisfactory Soldier. On 27 December 1983 the separation authority approved the recommendation and directed that the applicant be issued a General Discharge Certificate.

9. The applicant was discharged on 9 January 1984 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12a, for misconduct – drug abuse.

10. Army Regulation 635-200, then in effect, provides for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 14-12a states that members are subject to separation for a pattern of misconduct consisting solely of minor military disciplinary infractions. An under other than honorable conditions discharge is normally appropriate for separation for misconduct; however, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the member's overall record.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS :

1. The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2. The character of the applicant's discharge is more than fair considering the nature of the applicant's infractions. He could have received a discharge under other than honorable conditions.

3. The applicant's contention of good post service conduct is noted; however, this factor does not warrant the relief requested.

4. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.


BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__ KAN __ __ KLW __ __ KLW __ DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.





                  __Kathleen A. Newman____
                  CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID AR2003093380
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 20040304
TYPE OF DISCHARGE (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015236

    Original file (20060015236.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 May 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060015236 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. A DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ), dated 22 March 1982, states that the punishment of reduction to E-1 suspended for 90 days, imposed on 12 June 1981, was set aside. Records show the applicant...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011568

    Original file (20100011568.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, he states in 1989 he was medically diagnosed and treated for schizophrenia and now he believes his bad behavior on active duty was the result of this undiagnosed illness. The applicant contends his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded to a general discharge based on the passage of time, his certification as a nurse assistant since his discharge, and his medical diagnosis of schizophrenia. __________X__ ____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086024C070212

    Original file (2003086024C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. He also acknowledged that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091501C070212

    Original file (2003091501C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military records are not available; however, his records were summarized in a previous consideration of his case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records on 29 March 1995 in Docket Number AC93-08001. The Board on that date acted jupon the applicant's request that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable. Accordingly, on 24 March 1987 the applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03094310C070212

    Original file (03094310C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The application submitted in this case is dated 9 July 2003. The applicant was discharged on 27 June 1984. 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 limitations prescribed by law.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9307635

    Original file (9307635.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Military Justice Act of 1983 (Public Law 98-209), provides, in pertinent part, that military correction boards may not disturb the finality of a conviction 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: The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080710C070215

    Original file (2002080710C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The appropriate authority approved his request on 28 February 1983 and directed that he be discharged under other than honorable conditions. Accordingly, he was discharged under other than honorable conditions while on excess leave, on 18 March 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006947

    Original file (20090006947.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The orders show the general court-martial convening authority approved the sentence and directed that, except for the bad conduct discharge, the sentence be executed. The records of the FBI are under the jurisdiction of that agency and the Board does not have the authority to direct that they correct those records. While the applicant is correct that the findings of the drug charges should also include the final disposition of the charges on the FBI RAP sheet, the Board does not have the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019421

    Original file (20140019421.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Special Court-Martial Order Number 28, dated 11 February 1983, issued by the U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Dix, shows the applicant's conviction and sentence were affirmed and the convening authority ordered his bad conduct discharge executed. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. His conviction, confinement, and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068372C070402

    Original file (2002068372C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 April 1979, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for possession of marijuana. Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 8 June 1983, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 9, for drug abuse rehabilitation failure. There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.