| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Gale J. Thomas | Analyst |
| Mr. Arthur A. Omartian | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr. | Member | |
| Ms. Mae M. Bullock | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected by upgrading his discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was unjustly accused of date rape, that he was performing his duties as a military police and was set-up. The applicant submits no evidence in support of his request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 March 1977 for a period of 4 years. He completed basic combat and advanced individual training at Fort Bliss, Texas. He served in Korea from February 1979 to February 1980, and from February 1983 to February 1984.
In June 1977, he was awarded MOS 16P (Short range Missile Crewman) and in February 1981 he was awarded MOS 76V (Material Storage and Handling Specialist).
On 9 July 1984, his commander preferred court-martial charges against him for being absent without leave.
The applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) from 30 April 1984 until apprehended by civil authorities on 25 August 1984. He was transferred to military authorities at Fort Polk, Louisiana on 12 September 1984.
On 18 September 1984, he was processed and released to Geary County
Civilian authorities pending civilian charges for aggravated sexual battery. Records indicate, that as of 21 November 1984, he was serving a 1 to 5 year sentence at the Hutchinson State Penitentiary in Hutchinson, Kansas.
The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not in the available records. However, his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates he was separated on 20 November 1985, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial, and was issued an under other than honorable conditions discharge. His DD Form 214 shows he had 7 years,
4 months and 1 day of active service, and 476 days of lost time.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized
punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be
submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual's admission of guilt. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered 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. There is no evidence of record that the applicant was ever trained or served in the military occupational specialty of 94B (Military Police). The applicant was charged for being absent without leave, and there is no evidence that suggest he was ever charged or accused of rape by the Army.
2. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.
3. 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 that requirement.
4. 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
__AAO _ __HOF__ __MMB__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003088472 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20031016 |
| 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. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015876
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 4 August 1976, he requested discharge for the good of the service. Additionally, the applicant's contention that he was ordered by his first sergeant not to mention the sexual assault in his statement in support of his request for discharge was considered.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003247C070205
When the court-martial reconvened a discussion ensued and eventually the judge denied defense’s motion to dismiss charges based on the violation of the applicant’s speedy- trial rights. The judge denied the defense counsel’s request to enter a conditional plea. After hearing testimony from the applicant and closing arguments from counsel, she sentenced the applicant to be reduced to the pay grade of E-1 and to be discharged with a BCD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016496
On 9 May 1994, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The evidence of record further confirms the applicant voluntarily requested discharge to avoid a court-martial that could have resulted in a punitive discharge. His record documents no acts of significant achievement or valor and did not support the issuance of an honorable or a general discharge by the separation authority at the time of his discharge and it does not support an upgrade to an honorable or a general discharge at this...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072242C070403
The CIC opinion further states that the subsequent supplemental report characterizing the offenses of adultery, sodomy, and violation of a general order or regulation as having “insufficient evidence” does not warrant removal of the applicant’s name from the title block of the original ROI. The Board notes the applicant’s claim that her name should be removed from the title block of CID investigation number # 97-CID112-59583, from the DCII, and from any other records reflecting the titling...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061848C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 20 August 1998, the Army Discharge Review Board unanimously voted to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge. The Board also notes that the applicant’s counsel has proven that the applicant fraudulently enlisted, an offense that in and of itself could result in an under other than honorable conditions discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005179
The applicant's counsel contends the Army reported a CID titling decision for an allegation of rape and forcible sodomy which lacked probable cause. The available evidence shows the applicant requested the CID correct his record. The evidence of record confirms the results of a CID investigation provided a sufficient legal basis for the applicant to be titled for forced sodomy.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064419C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 22 March 1976, while serving in the pay grade of E-3, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for being absent without leave from 1 March to 2 March 1976. There is no evidence 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003085402C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He enlisted in Knoxville, Tennessee, on 3 January 1977, for a period of 3 years and training as a material supplyman. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and they must indicate that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000967
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. c. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits an application to either the Army Discharge Review Board or the ABCMR requesting change in discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073104C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable. 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.