| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Ms. Margaret K. Patterson | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Ted S. Kanamine | Member | |
| Mr. Lawrence Foster | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He served in the Army National Guard (ARNG) from 22 December 1994 through 8 December 1998. He completed his initial active duty for training (IADT) and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 63B (Wheel Vehicle Mechanic). On 9 December 1998, he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty in the rank and pay grade of specialist four/E-4 (SPC/E-4).
The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition. It does contain a disciplinary history that includes his acceptance of summarized nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on
19 October 1999, for disobeying the lawful order of a noncommissioned officer.
On 25 August 2000, a general court-martial (GCM) found the applicant guilty of violating Article 121 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) by stealing a pistol of a value exceeding $100.00, the property of the United States Government, on or about 11 May 2000. The resultant sentence included a reduction to the grade of private/E-1 (PV1), confinement for seven months, and a BCD. The GCM convening authority approved only so much of the sentence that provided for reduction to PV1, confinement for five months, and a BCD.
On 21 January 2001, the applicant was placed on excess leave pending the outcome of the appellate process.
On 9 May 2001, the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals upon consideration of the entire record, including consideration of the issues specified by the applicant, held that the findings of guilty and the sentence as approved by the GCM convening authority was correct in law and fact. Accordingly, the guilty finding and the sentence were affirmed.
On 30 July 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces denied the petition of review of the decision of the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals submitted on the applicant’s behalf.
On 27 June 2002, the BCD portion of the applicant’s sentence was ordered executed in GCM Order Number 130, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, Oklahoma. On 27 September 2002, the applicant was discharged accordingly. At the time of his discharge, he had completed a total of 3 years, 10 months, and 26 days of creditable active military service, had accrued 116 days of time lost due to confinement, and had been in an excess leave status for 607 days.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3 provides policy for the separation of members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge pursuant to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. It states that discharge would be accomplished only after the completion of the appellate process, and affirmation of the
court-martial findings and sentence.
Title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552 as amended does not permit any redress by this Board of the finality of a court-martial conviction and empowers the Board to only change a discharge if clemency is determined to be appropriate.
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. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses for which he was charged. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
2. By law, any redress by this Board of the finality of a court-martial conviction is prohibited. The Board is only empowered to change a discharge if clemency is determined to be appropriate to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed.
3. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s entire record of service and found it was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant clemency given the seriousness of the offense for which he was convicted. 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
___TK__ ___LF___ __MP____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003083775 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/05/13 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | BCD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 2002/09/27 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | GCM |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 30 | 105.0000 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008140C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 July 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR2004008140 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. On 4 May 2000, GCM Order 44, issued by Headquarters, United States Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Fort Sill, Oklahoma, directed, Article 71c of the UCMJ having been complied with, that the BCD portion of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003991
The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to an honorable discharge. It also shows that the applicant was discharged in the rank of PV1 under the provisions of chapter 3, Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), by reason of court-martial and that he received a BCD. Given the gravity of the offense that resulted in his GCM conviction and BCD, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support clemency by upgrading his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016118
The applicant requests upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD) to an honorable discharge (HD). The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued to the applicant on the date of his discharge shows that he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), section IV, as a result of court-martial. It stipulates, in pertinent part, that a Soldier will be given a BCD pursuant only to an approved sentence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088120C070403
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: A BCD was included in the sentences that resulted from both these court-martial convictions. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s entire record of service and found it was not sufficiently meritorious to warrant clemency given the seriousness of the offenses for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089687C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Chapter 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a soldier will be given one of these punitive discharges pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090446C070212
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: On 23 March 1994, the United States Army Court of Military Review upon consideration of the entire record, held that the findings of guilty and the sentence as approved by the GCM convening authority was correct in law and fact. Carl W. S. Chun Director, Army Board for Correction of Military RecordsINDEXCASE IDARSUFFIXRECONDATE BOARDEDTYPE OF DISCHARGE(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)DATE OF DISCHARGEDISCHARGE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001213
The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued to the applicant on the date of his discharge shows that he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), section IV, chapter 3, as a result of court-martial. It stipulates, that a Soldier will be given a dishonorable discharge or a BCD pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial, and that the appellate review must be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013262
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to either an honorable discharge (HD) or general under honorable conditions discharge (GD). ____________x_____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070003198
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070003198 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. On 3 April 2002, the applicant was discharged accordingly. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010094C071029
LaVerne M. Douglas | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. However, the convening authority's promulgating order executing the BCD, dated 8 September 1970, shows that all required post-trial reviews were conducted. After a thorough and comprehensive review of the applicant’s military service record, it is concluded that given his undistinguished record of military service, characterized by his extensive record of...