Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040006934C070208
Original file (20040006934C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        12 JULY 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040006934


      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             |
|     |Ms. Gale J. Thomas                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John Slone                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Shirley Powell                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Member               |

      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 the records of her deceased husband, a
former service member, be corrected by upgrading his discharge to
honorable.

2.  The applicant states her husband was very young, drinking heavily, and
experiencing stress when he committed the acts leading to his arrest and
subsequent conviction.  The applicant further states her husband discussed
with her his plans to request an upgrade of his discharge.

3.  The applicant provides no evidence in support of her request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The FSM enlisted in the Regular Army on 17 January 1979, for a period
of
4 years.  He was 19 years old at the time of enlistment.

2.  On 6 January 1983, he was convicted by a general court-martial of two
specifications of larceny, and one specification of unlawful entry.  He was
sentenced to reduction to Private E-1, confinement at hard labor for 30
months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and to be discharged from the
service with a bad conduct discharge.

3.  The findings and sentence were affirmed by the United States Army Court
of Military Review on 11 May 1984.

4.  On 23 October 1984, the United States Court of Military Appeals denied
his petition for grant of review.

5.  General Court-Martial Order Number 849, US Army Combined Army Center
and Fort Leavenworth, dated 4 December 1984, ordered that the sentence to a
bad conduct discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement at
hard labor for 30 months and reduction to Private E-1 be duly executed,
noting that the period of confinement had been served.

6.  The FSM was discharged on 8 January 1985, under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-11, as a result of court-martial, with a
bad conduct discharge.



7.  Title 10, 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.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200, set forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 3, paragraph 13-11, provides
that a bad conduct discharge will be issued pursuant to an approved
sentence of a general court-martial, after completion of the appellate
review, and once the sentence has been affirmed and ordered duly executed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is presumed that the
court-martial proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and
regulations applicable at the time.  The character of the discharge is
commensurate with his overall record.

2.  Although the former service member’s wife contends that he was young,
unhappy, and under stress due to his being away from his family, these
factors do not excuse his conduct, and do not warrant the relief requested
as a matter of equity.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show, 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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JS___  ___SP __  __SK ___  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.




                                  _______John Slone_________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040006934                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050712                                |
|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.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100014990

    Original file (20100014990.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel stated the FSM was convicted of serious offenses; however, it was imperative, in order to evaluate an appropriate punishment for such conduct, to also consider the offenses were committed while the FSM was under the influence of drugs and because he was addicted to drugs. The Secretary of the Army also advised that while confined the FSM's case would be periodically considered by the Army and Air Force Clemency and Parole Board and the Office of the Secretary of the Army to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004162C070206

    Original file (20050004162C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that her late husband the Former Service Member’s (FSM) discharge be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions. On 10 April 1975, the separation authority approved the discharge and directed that he be discharged with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate. On 16 May 1975, the FSM was discharged accordingly.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020627

    Original file (20110020627.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 May 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110020627 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states: * she would like her husband buried at the Roseburg National Cemetery * the FSM received an honorable discharge from the U.S. Marine Corps on 8 September 1981 * the FSM chose to join the U.S. Army after the U.S. Marine Corps because he wanted to be a pilot and the Army promised he would go to flight school * the FSM was tested after he joined the Army and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080007578

    Original file (20080007578.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. On 17 July 1973, the FSM surrendered to military authorities at Fort Dix, New Jersey, where charges were preferred against him for the AWOL charge. On 18 October 1973, the United States Army Court of Military Review (USACMR) having found the findings of guilty and sentence as approved by proper authority correct in law and fact and having determined, on the basis of the entire record, that the findings of guilty and only so much of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021093

    Original file (20140021093.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) shows she was discharged in the rank/grade of private/E-1, as a result of court-martial, in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), chapter 3, with a bad conduct discharge. Additionally, there is no evidence in the available records and the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence showing that her acts of indiscipline were the result of his age. Therefore, clemency in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001517

    Original file (20150001517.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 3, as a result of court-martial with a bad conduct character of service. The evidence of record shows the applicant was twice convicted by special courts-martial and both convictions involved periods of AWOL service. The evidence of record shows he was given a bad conduct discharge pursuant to an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021945

    Original file (20120021945.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 July 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120021945 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Special Court-Martial Order Number 54, Headquarters, 7th Infantry Division, Fort Ord, dated 21 July 1976, shows the sentence to a bad conduct discharge, a forfeiture of $240 pay for 4 months (forfeitures to apply to pay becoming due on or after the date of the convening authority's action), and reduction to the grade of private/E-1, adjudged on 9 October 1975, as promulgated...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060013880

    Original file (20060013880.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, upgrade of his Bad Conduct Discharge to an honorable discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory, but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. ___Richard R. Dunbar_____ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20060013880 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 2007/05/03 TYPE OF DISCHARGE BCD DATE OF DISCHARGE 19821120 DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR 635-200, Chapter 3, Section IV DISCHARGE REASON As a Result...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014002

    Original file (20110014002.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 10 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110014002 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) provides for the following characterization of service: a. Paragraph 3-7a states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits provided by law. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017044

    Original file (20080017044.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 July 1984, the applicant was discharged from the Army with a bad conduct discharge in the rank and pay grade of private/E-1 pursuant to the sentence of a special court-martial. This regulation provided, in pertinent part, that an enlisted person would be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial after completion of appellate review and after such affirmed sentence had been duly ordered executed. The evidence of record...