| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. William Blakely | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry | Member | ||
| Ms. Marla J. Troup | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he is grateful that there is a process that gives soldiers the opportunity to upgrade their discharges. He indicates that he is providing some paperwork that provides the details surrounding his discharge. He also states that he is providing character references, reports on his post service accomplishments, and a police report to verify his post service good conduct. He claims that his outlook on life has changed and that he is a productive and good member of his community and church. He is proud of the fact that he was able to get and keep a job, and that he has become a home owner. He also states that he has continued his education and is now pursuing a degree in athletic training. He states he hopes and prays that his case will be reviewed and with a kindness of heart, and that his discharge will be upgraded.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: In effect, reiterates the contentions and desires of the applicant for an upgrade of his discharge, and requests a fair and impartial assessment of the applicant’s request for clemency.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
On 26 May 1993, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He was trained and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11M (Fighting Vehicle Infantryman), and the highest rank he attained during his active duty tenure was specialist/E-4 (SPC/E-4).
Upon completion of his training, the applicant was assigned to Fort Knox, Kentucky. He arrived there on 21 September 1993, and served there until his separation on 15 May 1998. His record reveals no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition.
On 19 July 1996, the applicant was convicted pursuant to his pleas of conspiring to commit larceny of $828.44, committing larceny of $828.44, and forgery. The resultant sentence included a dishonorable discharge (DD), confinement for six months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and reduction to private/E-1.
General Court-Martial Order Number 108, dated 1 November 1996, issued by Headquarters, US Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, Fort Knox, Kentucky, confirms that the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as provided for a Bad-Conduct Discharge (BCD), forfeiture of all pay and allowances, reduction to the grade E-1; and ordered that all but the BCD portion of the sentence be executed.
On 26 June 1997, the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals examined the record of trial and the findings of guilty were affirmed. The court affirmed only so much of the sentence as provided for a BCD, forfeiture of $577.00 pay per month until the discharge was executed, and reduction to private/E-1.
General Court-Martial Order Number 43, dated 20 February 1998, issued by Headquarters, US Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, Fort Knox, Kentucky, ordered the unexecuted portion of the sentence pertaining to the applicant’s BCD executed. On 15 May 1998, the applicant was discharged accordingly. At the time of his discharge, he had completed 4 years, 11 months, and 20 days of creditable active military service.
The letters of support submitted by the applicant attest to his post service achievements and conduct.
Title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552, as amended, does not permit any redress by the Army Board of Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) of the finality of a court-martial conviction, and it empowers the ABCMR 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 Board notes the applicant’s and his counsel’s contention that his BCD should be upgraded based upon his post service conduct. However, it finds that this factor alone does not provide a sufficiently mitigating basis to upgrade his discharge at this time.
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 evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations in effect at the time and that his trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses with which he was charged.
4. Notwithstanding the applicant’s contentions and desires, the Board finds that the type of discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted and accurately reflects his overall record of service. Therefore, it finds there is an insufficient basis to grant clemency in this case.
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
__FE__ __HOF___ __MT__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003085574 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | BCD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19980515 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR635-200, Chapter 3. . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | Court Martial |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 31 | 105.0100 |
| 2. 811 | 144.9221 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
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 | CY2008 | 20080017062
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). In accordance with Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to set aside a conviction. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulation and his rights were protected throughout the court-martial process.
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 | CY2009 | 20090011278
The applicant's record shows that he initially enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 14 July 1989, and was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91G (Food Service Operations). On 27 June 2008, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The applicant's BCD was appropriate given the gravity of the offenses for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016227
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued to the applicant on the date of his discharge shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 3, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of court-martial and received a BCD. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051836C070420
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 applicant’s SPCM conviction and the resultant BCD were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations in effect at the time.
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 | CY2011 | 20110012760
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110012760 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001776
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 September 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140001776 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the final discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.
ARMY | DRB | CY2005 | 20050010433
The applicant requests, in effect, that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded. On 29 April 1987, the United States Army Court of Military Review, after a review of the entire record in the applicant’s case, held that the findings of guilty and the sentence as approved by the convening authority were correct in law and fact. It also shows that at the time of his separation, he had completed a total of 12 years and 3 months of active military service.