RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 18 December 2007
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070009141
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.
Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano
Director
Ms. Deyon D. Battle
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. John N. Slone
Chairperson
Ms. Marla J. N. Troup
Member
Mr. Thomas M. Ray
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 his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general or an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states that he truly believes the punishment that he received was too severe for a "small scale" of drugs (less than O.5 grams). He states that he honestly believes that he should be given a second chance if possible.
3. The applicant provides in support of his application, a copy of his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicants 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. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. On 18 June 1987, the applicant enlisted in the Army in Miami, Florida, for 4 years, in the pay grade of E-3. He successfully competed his training as an infantryman. He was transferred to Germany on 6 October 1988 and he was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 October 1990.
3. On 28 December 1990, the applicant was convicted, pursuant to his pleas, by a general court-martial of wrongfully distributing marijuana in the hashish form on diverse occasions from 1 September 1990 to 1 November 1990. He was sentenced to a BCD, confinement for 9 months, a reduction to the pay grade of E-1 and a forfeiture of all pay and allowances.
4. The convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged and on 13 January 1992, General Court-Martial Order Number 3, Headquarters, United States Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, noting that the findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority had been affirmed, ordered that the BCD be executed.
5. Accordingly, on 24 February 1992, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 3 as a result of a duly reviewed and affirmed general court-martial conviction. He had completed 4 years, 1 month and 3 days of net active service and he had approximately 7 months and 5 days of lost time due to being in confinement. He was furnished a BCD.
6. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3 provides that a Soldier will be given a BCD pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence duly executed.
7. 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 a conviction. Rather it is only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process and then only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to modify the severity of the punishment imposed.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged. 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.
2. The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate considering the facts of the case.
3. The applicant's contentions have been noted. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to the seriousness of his offenses. Additionally, in accordance with the applicable law, this Board is not empowered to set aside a court-martial conviction. It is only empowered to change the severity of the imposed sentence if clemency is determined to be
appropriate. Considering his felonious acts (wrongfully distributing marijuana in the hashish form), which resulted in his court-martial conviction, clemency does not appear to be appropriate in this case. However, the applicant is not precluded from applying to the United States Pardon Attorney concerning this matter.
4. 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 this requirement.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___JNS__ __MJNT_ __TMR__ 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 N. Slone____
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR20070009141
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED
20071218
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 30
105.0000/COURT-MARTIAL
2. 31
105.0100/SENTENCE INCLUDE DISCHARGE
3.
4.
5.
6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012897
The convening authority approved the sentence and the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings and the sentence on 26 October 1990. The available records show the applicant was more than 24 years of old at the time of his enlistment and 27 years old at the time of discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015959
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 February 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110015959 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provides three letters in support of his application: CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged with a BCD on 29 April 1991 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 3, section IV, as a result of court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086536C070212
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 30 January 1986, the United States Court of Military Appeals denied the applicant's petition for grant of a review of the decision of the USACMR.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004758
The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge. The sentence was approved and, except for the part of the sentence pertaining to a bad conduct discharge, ordered to be executed. U.S. Army Correctional Brigade, General Court-Martial Order Number 757, dated 4 December 1990, shows the applicant's sentence to a bad conduct discharge, confinement for 14 months, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances, adjudged on 29 September 1989, as promulgated in General Court-Martial Order...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120019298
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 applicants 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 | CY2012 | 20120008623
BOARD DATE: 15 November 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120008623 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. 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. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120009795
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 | CY2015 | 20150003133
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 October 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003133 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his record to show he was discharged with a general discharge (GD) vice a bad conduct discharge (BCD). Accordingly, on 23 August 1985, the applicant was discharged as a result of a court-martial with a BCD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008771
The appellate review must be completed and the sentence affirmed before the bad conduct discharge could be duly executed. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. The applicant has not provided any evidence or argument to show his discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090015297
A review of the available records does not show that the applicant ever petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. _______ _ __X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090015297 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF...