| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti | Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. Patrick H< M | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to fully honorable.
2. The applicant states that he made a bad decision while in the Army, and he was punished for that decision. He was “young and dumb” when he made his bad decision. He is now older and has changed a lot. His BCD is now hurting him in the civilian community. He would like to put his mistakes behind him. He is willing to rejoin the military to get his discharge upgraded. If reentering the military isn’t an option, he would like to have a positive discharge on his records. He adds that he became a husband in 2002 and now knows what it means to be a responsible person.
3. The applicant does not provide any documentation in support of his request.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. He enlisted in the Regular Army with no prior service on 3 August 1993. He was awarded the military occupational specialty of infantryman and was promoted to pay grade E-3.
2. On 23 February 1995, he was tried by a General Court-Martial. He was 20 years old at that time. He was found guilty pursuant to his pleas of larceny of an unknown quantity of checks; of larceny of $150.00; of a second specification of larceny of $150.00; of a third specification of larceny of $150.00; of larceny of $85.00; and of four specifications of forgery. He was sentenced to a BCD, confinement for 18 months, a forfeiture of $500.00 per month for 18 months, and a reduction to pay grade E-1. The convening authority approved the sentence but suspended confinement in excess of 12 months for one year.
3. He was then imprisoned. On 12 June 1995, the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the conviction. Upon completion of his sentence, he was given excess leave from 14 December 1995 to 9 April 1997.
4. On 9 April 1997, he was given a BCD. He had 2 years, 10 months and 26 days of creditable service. He did not have any significant awards or decorations.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant’s theft of checks, and his forging the signature of the check’s rightful owner to cash them, certainly warranted the sentence imposed.
2. While the applicant was young, he was 20 years old when he was tried by court-martial. There is no evidence which would show that immaturity caused the applicant problems while he was on active duty.
3. It is commendable that the applicant has now matured and taken on the responsibilities of a family. However, living a normal, productive life does not normally provide a basis for upgrading a properly issued discharge.
4. 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__phm___ ___mhm_ ____fne_ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003086153 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20031202 |
| 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. | |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069967C070402
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. The applicant requests...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00709
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00709 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. Because her approved sentence included a bad conduct discharge, the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed the applicant’s conviction and, on 31 October...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057879C070420
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. The applicant requests...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070016759C071029
Roland S. Venable | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant’s adjudged sentence was to be confined for two years and to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge. In pertinent part, it states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015632
The applicant's DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 11 of Army Regulation 645-200 (Separation of Enlisted Personnel) on 20 March 1978, with a bad conduct discharge as a result of court-martial. 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...
USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1002044
The Applicant’s service record documents that he completed the adjudicated period of confinement as awarded by the Special Court-Martial sentence. On 14 May 1996, the Applicant submitted a request for clemency to the Convening Authority; on 19 August, the Convening Authority acted on the request for clemency and reduced the sentence of confinement for six years to a period of four years. Having conducted a detailed review of both the records of trial by Special and by General Court-Martial...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03098031C070212
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 1 May 1967 the sentence was affirmed and the bad conduct discharge ordered to be executed. The record of trial by general court-martial is not available to the Board; however, absent evidence to the contrary the applicant's conviction for larceny and conspiracy to commit larceny, his sentence to confinement, and his bad conduct discharge are correct.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100306C070208
The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. 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...
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 | CY2001 | 2001064564C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge. 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: