RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 8 December 2005
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050001380
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
Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. Richard T. Dunbar
Chairperson
Mr. James B. Gunlicks
Member
Mr. Scott W. Faught
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 reinstatement of his commission.
2. The applicant states that because of a wrongful conviction, he was boarded out of the Army which resulted in the loss of all of his veterans benefits and his standing as a Soldier of many years service. After serving 19 months in prison, his conviction was reversed upon appeal. He was then acquitted of the charges at a new trial.
3. The applicant provides Orders 103-050 dated 30 October 1985 which show that the applicant, an Army Reserve captain assigned to a troop program unit, was dropped from the rolls of the Army effective 15 August 1985 under the provisions of Army Regulation 135-175, paragraph 3-5; a letter from the Clerk of the Court, The Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, dated 26 January 1987, which stated that the court had ruled that the applicants conviction was Reversed and [his case was] remanded for a new trial; and two documents from the Superior Court of the State of Washington dated 2 November 1987 which show that a jury found the applicant not guilty of assault in the first degree.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of alleged error which occurred on 15 August 1985. The application submitted in this case was received by the Boards staff on 28 January 2005.
2. 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. This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file.
3. The applicants military records were not provided to the Board and are presumed to be lost.
4. Army Regulation 135-178, Chapter 3, in effect at the time, stated that an officer may be dropped from the rolls of the Army when the officer is sentenced to confinement in a Federal or State penitentiary or correctional institution after having been found guilty of an offense by a civil court, provided the sentence had become final, whether or not the officer was actually confined.
5. In the processing of this case, on 27 October 2005 the Boards staff contacted the applicant and requested that he provide documents to show exactly what he was initially convicted of. The applicant stated that he would contact the court to obtain his original conviction documents and would send them as soon as he received them. As of this date no additional documents have been received by the Boards staff.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant has submitted documents which show that he was dropped from the rolls of the Army due to civil conviction. The applicant has also submitted documents to show that a civil conviction was reversed and remanded to a new trial, and the new trial found the applicant not guilty.
2. However, the applicant did not submit court documents which would show what he was initially convicted of. If the applicant was convicted of more than one offense, the reversal of a conviction and subsequent acquittal of the charges which led to that conviction may not negate the validity of the applicants separation. The other remaining convictions may have satisfied the requirements of Army Regulation 135-175 to drop the applicant from the rolls of the Army.
3. Without documentation to clearly show what the applicant was convicted of there is insufficient basis in which to grant his request.
4. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 15 August 1985; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 14 August 1988. However, the applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___jbg___ ____rtd__ ___swf__ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Board determined that 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.
2. 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 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law. Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
_________Richard T. Dunbar________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR20050001380
SUFFIX
RECON
20051208
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
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 | CY2005 | 20050001380C070206
In the processing of this case, on 27 October 2005 the Board’s staff contacted the applicant and requested that he provide documents to show exactly what he was initially convicted of. The applicant has also submitted documents to show that a civil conviction was reversed and remanded to a new trial, and the new trial found the applicant not guilty. Without documentation to clearly show what the applicant was convicted of there is insufficient basis in which to grant his request.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054008C070420
APPLICANT STATES : On 20 January 2001, he received a “full and unconditional pardon” from the President of the United States in the matter for which the Army dropped him from the rolls and removed him from the Colonel’s promotion list. In general, a pardon is granted on the basis of a petitioner’s demonstrated good conduct for a substantial period of time after conviction and service of sentence. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008612C070208
LaVerne M Douglas | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant provides: a. AR 135-175 (Army National Guard and Army Reserve – Separation of Officers) prescribes the policies, criteria, and procedures governing the separation of Reserve officers of the Army.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072743C070403
On 20 August 1997, the OKARNG issued a NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) honorably discharging the applicant from the OKARNG as a SGT, pay grade E-5, by reason of the individual's request. The investigation further substantiated that: the applicant submitted false information on his application for Army National Guard federal recognition in January 1987 by stating “No” to the question, “Have you ever been arrested or convicted by a civil court of other than minor...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061292C070421
On 13 November 1987, the U. S. Court of Military Review reassessed the sentence on the basis of the error noted and the entire record and affirmed only so much of the sentence as provided for a bad conduct discharge. Therefore, the Army Court could be certain that even without the forgery conviction the applicant would have received a bad conduct discharge and therefore the Army Court correctly reassessed the sentence. On 14 April 1988, the U. S. Court of Military Appeals denied the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061180C070421
d. Records show that the applicant was properly notified of intent to separate him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206, that he was afforded the opportunity to have his case considered by a board of officers and to be represented by counsel, that his case was heard by a board of officers, and that only after receiving the recommendations of the board of officers, did the appropriate separation authority direct the applicant’s discharge. The Board considered the applicant’s...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073777C070403
The applicant requests that the records of her deceased spouse, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to restore his rank and grade of Staff Sergeant, E-6, to show that he applied for retired pay, and that she receive the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity. If death does not occur before age 60, the RCSBP costs for options B and C are deducted from the member’s retired pay. Nevertheless, the Board notes that the applicant completed 20 qualifying years of non-Regular service for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016850
f. two Board members, COL F. K. and COL N. C., received their legal advice from the SJA Board President, COL E. M.; g. all three Board members were in the rating chain of the appointing authority, MG W. C.; h. COL E. M.s presence on the Board despite his serving as advisor and chief legal officer of the Regional Support Command (RSC), where he supervised and rated the recorder and interacted daily with the Command; i. the presence of COL E. M. on the Board despite his position as a Judge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010668
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 December 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110010668 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant contends that his UOTHC discharge should be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions, because there were a lot of errors in the court-martial and that the charges were going to be dropped and everything reinstated. The evidence clearly shows that after the applicant's court-martial was remanded, he admitted his guilt and requested to be discharged in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005428
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of her records to show she was issued an honorable discharge for the period of her military service from 1985 to 1988. The applicant provides a 16-page self-authored statement (14 of the 16 pages on VA Forms 21-4138 (Statements in Support of Claim), dated 28 February 2008; handwritten letter from Mrs. Florence J______/B_____, dated 12 February 2003; handwritten letter from Ms. Kathy J______, dated 10 February 2003; DD Form 214 (Report of...