Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006921C070206
Original file (20050006921C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           10 January 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050006921


      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. Wanda L. Waller               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Kenneth Wright                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Dale DeBruler                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Qawiy Sabree                  |     |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, in effect, that clemency be granted in the form
of a general discharge.

2.  The applicant states his bad conduct discharge was inequitable because
it was based on one isolated incident in three years and one month of
service with no other adverse actions.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty); five letters of appreciation for
contributions to community organizations; a membership letter, dated 29 May
2002, from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; a letter, dated 12 March 1999,
from the Foothills Technical Institute requesting participation in an
internship program; a letter, dated 2 June 2003, from the Arkansas
Municipal Police Association thanking the applicant for his pledge; a
letter, dated 5 April 2001, from the Arkansas State Lodge Fraternal Order
of Police thanking the applicant for his pledge; and a Certificate of
Eligibility.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged injustice which
occurred on 18 July 1984.  The application submitted in this case is dated
4 May 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 limitations 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 applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant enlisted on 1 April 1981. He successfully completed One
Station Unit Training in military occupational specialty 11B (infantryman).

4.  On 24 March 1983, the applicant was convicted by a special court-
martial of wrongful possession with intent to distribute marijuana,
wrongfully distributing marijuana, and wrongfully soliciting another
Soldier to commit perjury.  He was sentenced to be reduced to E-1, to
forfeit $300 pay per month for 4 months, to be confined for 4 months, and
to be discharged from the service with a bad conduct discharge.  On 7 June
1983, the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as
provided for a bad conduct discharge, confinement at hard labor for 3
months, forfeitures of $300 pay per month for 3 months, and reduction to
E-1.

5.  On 12 April 1984, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review set aside the
findings of guilty of specification 1 (possessing with intent to distribute
marijuana) of the charge and dismissed the specification.  The remaining
findings of guilty and the sentence were affirmed.

6.  The bad conduct discharge was ordered to be executed on 22 June 1984.

7.  Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 18 July 1984 under the
provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 as a result of a court-martial.  He
was issued a bad conduct discharge.  He had served 3 years, 1 month and 3
days of total active service with 75 days of lost time due to confinement.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for separation
of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 3 of this regulation states that a Soldier
will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence
of a general or special court-martial.  The appellate review must be
completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.

9.  Section 1552(f), Title 10, United States Code states that the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records can only review records of court-
martial and related administrative records to correct a record to
accurately reflect action taken by reviewing authorities under the Uniform
Code of Military Justice or to take clemency action.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that a general
discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  When
authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory
but not sufficiently
meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.  A characterization of under
honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s
separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Good post service conduct alone is not a basis for upgrading a
discharge.

2.  Evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged with a bad
conduct discharge for distributing marijuana and soliciting another Soldier
to commit perjury.  As a result, his record of service was not
satisfactory.  Therefore, clemency in the form of a general discharge is
not warranted in this case.
3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged injustice
now under consideration on 18 July 1984; therefore, the time for the
applicant to file a request for correction of any injustice expired on 17
July 1987.  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

KW____  _DD_____  __QS____  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.




            ___Kenneth Wright_____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050006921                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060110                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |BCD                                     |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19840718                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |As a result of a court-martial          |
|BOARD DECISION          |NC                                      |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |144.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003280C070206

    Original file (20050003280C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Good post service conduct alone is not a basis for upgrading a discharge. Evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged with a bad conduct discharge for distributing marijuana.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00453 12

    Original file (00453 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 24 October 2012. The discharge authority directed the execution of your BCD. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002256

    Original file (20140002256.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Headquarters, U.S. Army Correctional Facility, Fort Riley, KS, General Court-Martial Order Number 272, dated 24 May 1985, shows that after completion of all required post-trial and appellate reviews, the convening authority ordered the applicant's bad conduct discharge duly executed. His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged in the rank/grade of private/E-1 as a result of court-martial in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015568

    Original file (20090015568.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that her bad conduct discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. The applicant's record of service included one instance of nonjudical punishment, one general court-martial conviction for drug distribution, and 226 days of lost time. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a general under honorable conditions discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009795

    Original file (20120009795.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. On 4 June 1984, the sentence was approved and the record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for review by a Court of Military Review. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged on 24 January 1985 under the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007339

    Original file (20140007339.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant contends that his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge because it was to be upgraded as a condition of his plea agreement and he had two periods of honorable service prior to the period of service under review. Moreover, the evidence of record shows the two periods of honorable active duty service are appropriately recorded and documented in his military service record. Thus, his record of service during the period under...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012041

    Original file (20080012041.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states that he has two honorable discharges and that the penalty of a bad conduct discharge was not warranted. The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of his application. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a general discharge or an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019298

    Original file (20120019298.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to a general discharge. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. c. Paragraph 3-7b states that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080003317

    Original file (20080003317.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records do not show any significant acts of valor during his military service. This form further shows the applicant completed 2 years, 11 months, and 3 days of creditable military service. There is no indication in the applicant’s records that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within that Board’s 15 year statute of limitations.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001661

    Original file (20120001661.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of the wrongful distribution of marijuana on 10 May 1983. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. He completed training, was awarded an MOS, advanced to pay grade E-3, and completed a 1-year period of service in Germany prior to being tried.