RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 12 June 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080003248
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.
Director
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Chairperson
Member
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 an honorable discharge.
2. The applicant states that he has served his punishment and wishes to have his discharge upgraded to an honorable discharge.
3. The applicant provides a two-page statement explaining the circumstances in his case; four unauthenticated third-party statements and three authenticated third-party statements of support; a criminal records check from the Kansas City, Missouri Police Department; a copy of his civilian and military transcripts; copies of his marriage license and his childrens birth certificates; copies of his awards of the Air Assault Badge and Army Commendation Medal; and copies of various certificates of course completion for military training courses.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicants records, though somewhat incomplete, show that he was born on 4 October 1979. He enlisted in the Regular Army in the pay grade of E-3 in St. Louis, Missouri on 25 March 2002 for a period of 4 years, training as a unit supply specialist, a cash enlistment bonus and participation in the student loan repayment program.
2. He completed his training and was transferred to Fort Campbell, Kentucky for duty as a supply clerk. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 1 October 2003.
3. His records also show that on 29 January 2004, he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) for meritorious service while serving in the pay grade of E-4, as a supply clerk in Iraq during the period of 19 March 2003 to 2 February 2004.
4. On 25 February 2005, the applicant was convicted by a General Court-Martial, pursuant to his plea, of stealing five DELL Laptop computers on or about 18 November 2004. He was sentenced to confinement for 9 months and a BCD. He was placed on excess leave on 26 September 2005.
5. On 24 August 2005, the United States Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings and sentence as approved by the convening authority.
6. On 5 January 2006, General Court-Martial Order Number 6 was published by Headquarters, United States Army Armor Center and Fort Knox, which indicated that the applicants sentence had been finally affirmed and directed that his BCD be executed.
7. On 10 March 2006, he was discharged pursuant to a duly reviewed and affirmed court-martial conviction. He had served 3 years, 4 months, and 12 days of total active service and had approximately 215 days of lost time due to confinement.
8. Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, provides, in pertinent part, that the Board 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 moderate 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 appear to be appropriate considering the available facts of the case.
3. The applicants contentions and supporting documents have been noted. However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief when compared to the seriousness of his offense.
4. The applicant violated the trust placed in him as a Soldier and a custodian of military supplies by stealing government property with the intent to sell them for funds for his own use rather than seek assistance of the chain of command for financial assistance. Accordingly, his service does not rise to the level of a discharge under honorable conditions.
5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, 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.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__XXX __ __XXX__ __XXX__ 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.
___ XXX ___
CHAIRPERSON
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080003248
4
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
1901 SOUTH BELL STREET, 2ND FLOOR
ARLINGTON, VA 22202-4508
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011121
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 SEPTEMBER 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080011121 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 2 February 1971, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for two specifications of failure to go to his place of duty.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130011935
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. As a result, clemency is not warranted in this case. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000798
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 03 June 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080000798 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. On 7 October 1969, the applicants request for restoration to duty and clemency on the sentence to confinement was disapproved. While the applicant may have matured and become a productive citizen, his discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016780
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). On 19 June 1979, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence in the applicant's case after determining they were correct in law and fact. Headquarters, 7th Infantry Division and Fort Ord, California, SPCM Order Number 96, dated 7 November 1980, shows the applicant's conviction and sentence had been affirmed pursuant to Article 66 of the UCMJ and directed,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014641
When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. 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. Accordingly, his punishment was not disproportionate to the offenses for which he was convicted and he has failed to show sufficient evidence or reasons to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100018981
The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to under honorable conditions (general). Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. The conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012426
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general under honorable conditions. It stipulates that a Soldier would be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial and that the appellate review must be completed and affirmed before the sentence was ordered duly executed.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000551
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 July 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110000551 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Accordingly, his punishment was not disproportionate to the offenses for which he was convicted and he failed to show sufficient evidence or reasons to warrant an upgrade of his discharge based on clemency.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120012317
A review of his official records failed to show the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis for clemency in his case or an upgrade of his discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002928
The applicant requests, in effect, that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge (GD). On 12 October 1983, the United States Army Court of Military Review examined the applicant's record of trial, found it to be legally sufficient to support the findings of guilty and the sentence, and affirmed the applicant's conviction. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the discharge...