RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 12 October 2006
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060004576
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. John Infante | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. Gerald Purcell | |Member |
| |Ms. Karmin Jenkins | |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 an honorable discharge or a pardon.
2. The applicant states that while he was absent without leave (AWOL) he
was emotionally upset and he turned to drinking because of marital
problems. He contends that he does not drink anymore and he is a good
citizen
3. The applicant provides copies of his service personnel records.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Having prior service in the Army, the applicant enlisted on 1 November
1945. He served as a truck driver and was honorably discharged on 6
October 1948. He reenlisted on 8 October 1948 for a period of 3 years. On
17 October 1951, he was honorably discharged. The applicant reenlisted on
18 October 1951 for a period of 6 years.
2. On 28 July 1952, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial
of two specifications of AWOL (25 February 1952 to 4 March 1952 and 19
March 1952 to 18 July 1952 and) and larceny. He was sentenced to be
confined at hard labor for 6 months, to forfeit $39 per month for 6 months,
and to be reduced to
E-1. On 31 July 1952, the convening authority approved only so much of the
sentence as provided for confinement at hard labor for 6 months, forfeiture
of $28 pay per month for 6 months, and reduction to E-1.
3. On 14 October 1954, in accordance with his plea, the applicant was
convicted by a general court-martial of being AWOL from 10 December 1953 to
20 September 1954. He was sentenced to be discharged from the service with
a dishonorable discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, and to be
confined at hard labor for 1 year. On 28 October 1954, the convening
authority approved the sentence.
4. On 17 November 1954, the United States Army Board of Review, Office of
The Judge Advocate General affirmed the findings of guilty and the
sentence. On 23 December 1954, the convening authority ordered the
dishonorable discharge executed.
5. The Army discharged the applicant on 27 December 1954 with a
dishonorable discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-364, as
a result of a general court-martial. He had served a total of 10 years, 11
months, and 20 days of creditable active service with 265 days of lost
time.
6. Army Regulation 615-364, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority for the separation of enlisted personnel with dishonorable and
bad conduct discharges. It stated, in pertinent part, that an enlisted
person would be discharged with a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an
approved sentence of a general or special court-martial imposing a bad
conduct discharge.
7. 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 (UCMJ) or to take clemency action.
8. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7, provides that an honorable
discharge is a separation with honor and entitles the recipient to benefits
provided by law. The honorable characterization is appropriate when the
quality of the member’s service generally has met the standards of
acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel (emphasis
added), or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization
would be clearly inappropriate.
9. 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.
10. The Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to
grant service member’s pardons for convictions by a general or special
court-martial. Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution reserves in
the President of the United States the authority to grant pardons for
federal offenses, to include convictions by court-martial.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant’s claim that marital problems caused him to go AWOL does
not provide a basis for upgrading his discharge. There is no evidence the
applicant sought assistance from his chain of command or chaplain on a way
to resolve his problems within established Army procedures prior to going
AWOL.
2. The applicant’s post-service conduct and his family circumstances are
noted. However, the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to
warrant an upgrade of his discharge as a matter of equity.
3. The applicant’s record of service included one special court-martial
conviction, one general court-martial conviction, and 265 days of lost
time. As a result, his record of service was not satisfactory and did not
meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army
personnel. Therefore, clemency in the form of a general discharge or an
honorable discharge is not warranted in this case.
4. The Army Board for Correction of Military Records has no authority to
grant the applicant’s request for a pardon. The applicant may obtain more
information concerning Presidential Pardons and a Pardon application from
the Office of the Pardon Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice
(www.usdoj.gov/pardon). Soldiers seeking a pardon must complete the
Department of Justice form, “Petition for Pardon After Completion of
Sentence,” and send it to: Office of The Judge Advocate General,
Department of the Army, Criminal Law Division, 1777 N. Kent Street, 10th
Floor, Rosslyn, Virginia 22209.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
JI______ __GP___ __KJ_____ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
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.
__John Infante________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20060004576 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON | |
|DATE BOARDED |20061012 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE |DD |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE |19541227 |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AR 615-364 |
|DISCHARGE REASON |As a result of a general court-martial |
|BOARD DECISION |NC |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. |144.0000 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110001642
He departed the continental United States on 30 October 1952 and he arrived in Japan on 14 November 1952 and Korea on 16 July 1953. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicants record of service included two prior court-martial convictions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060000936C070205
The available records indicate that the applicant was approved for a waiver of lost time on 31 March 1948, to enlist in the Army. Army Regulation 615-364, then in effect, set forth the conditions under which enlisted personnel could be discharged with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge. Title 10, United Stated Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, provides, in pertinent part, that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to set aside...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071187C070402
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. His DD Form 214 indicates that he had 3 years and 28 days of creditable service and 655 days of lost time. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072845C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. There is nothing in the available records to support the applicant’s contention that he was eligible for a hardship discharge and was not provided assistance.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001063615C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. He had completed 1 year, 9 months, and 12 days of active military service. 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:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007871
His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the type of discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted. His record of service included three summary court-martial convictions, two special court-martial convictions, and 404 days of lost time. Therefore, his record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant an upgraded discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019610
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 615-364, in effect at the time, stated an enlisted person would be dishonorably discharged pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general court-martial imposing dishonorable discharge. His conviction and sentence by general court-martial were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006926
One previous conviction was considered. On 18 March 1954, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 615-364 (Enlisted Personnel Discharge Dishonorable and Bad Conduct), by reason of court-martial, and he received a DD. As a result, neither his overall record of service or post-service conduct support clemency in this case.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087092C070212
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: The evidence of record also does not support counsel's contention that the applicant lacked maturity.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000777
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 September 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140000777 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's military service records are not available to the Board for review. The evidence of record shows that during the period of service under review the applicant was AWOL for more than 1 year and 6 months, he had two prior convictions by court-martial, and he was convicted by general court-martial and issued a bad conduct discharge.