Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014141
Original file (20080014141.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  18 November 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080014141 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that there was no error.  He would like for his BCD to be upgraded to an honorable discharge so that he can get on with his life.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation in support of his request. 

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 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.  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 applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 August 1980.  He was trained as a Light Weapons Infantryman, in military occupational specialty (MOS), 11B.  He was promoted to pay grade E-3 effective 1 July 1981. 

3.  At a special court-martial on 11 November 1981, while serving overseas in Germany, the applicant was found guilty pursuant to his plea of stealing US Currency of a value of $460.00, the property of another Soldier.  He was sentenced to reduction to pay grade E-1, to a forfeiture of $300.00 pay per month for 3 months, to be confined at hard labor for 75 days, and to be discharged with a BCD.  On 15 January 1982 the sentence was approved.

4.  The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for review by the Court of Military Review.  Pending completion of the review, the applicant was confined at the United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.  The sentence to confinement was deferred on 28 December 1981.  The unexecuted portion of confinement was remitted on 1 March 1982.

5.  On 31 March 1982, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence.

6.  The provisions of Article 71(c) having been complied with, the sentence was ordered duly executed on 5 August 1982.

7.  On 22 December 1982, the applicant was discharged from the Army pursuant to the sentence of a special court-martial and he was issued a BCD.  He had served 2 years, 2 months, and 16 days of creditable service and he had 47 days of lost time due to being in confinement. 

8.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Paragraph 3-11 of that regulation provides 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 duly ordered executed.

10.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, 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.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7a, 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, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  Whenever there is doubt, it is to be resolved in favor of the individual.

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 regulation.

2.  The evidence shows the applicant was tried by a special court-martial and was found guilty pursuant to his plea of stealing US Currency of a value of $460.00, the property of another Soldier.  He was discharged pursuant to the sentence of a special court-martial and he was issued a bad conduct discharge after the sentence was affirmed.

3.  The applicant has not provided evidence to show that his discharge was unjust or evidence sufficient to mitigate the character of his discharge.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show, to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise 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

____x___  ___x____  ____x___  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.




      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20080014141



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080014141



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000349

    Original file (20100000349.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 June 1983, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review set aside the guilty finding of wrongfully appropriating U.S. currency of a value of $50.00, the property of another Soldier, and affirmed only so much of the sentence as provided for a BCD and confinement at hard labor for 2 months. A review of the available records does not show that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010184

    Original file (20080010184.txt) 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. The applicant has not provided evidence to show that his discharge was unjust or evidence sufficient to mitigate the character of his discharge. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013417

    Original file (20110013417.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to a general discharge. On 10 July 1995 while incarcerated by the Georgia Department of Corrections, he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his 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 | CY2001 | 2001062845lC070421

    Original file (2001062845lC070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. On 16 July 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge. 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 | CY2013 | 20130000441

    Original file (20130000441.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The available records show the applicant was 18 years of age at the time of his enlistment and 20 years and 6 months old at the time of discharge. There is no evidence that indicates he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. 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 | CY2009 | 20090010082

    Original file (20090010082.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general under honorable conditions discharge. He was sentenced to confinement for 22 months and to be discharged from the service with a BCD. The 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022028

    Original file (20120022028.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to an honorable 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. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations -...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010222

    Original file (20060010222.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an Honorable Discharge (HD). 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005294

    Original file (20090005294.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states he was locked up for four months and given a BCD because they thought he had lied. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a general discharge under honorable conditions. _______ _ 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140017587

    Original file (20140017587.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 June 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140017587 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. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted...