IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 13 JANUARY 2009
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080016931
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 reconsideration be given to his request that the findings of guilty against him for two violations of Article 121 (Larceny) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in his court-martial conviction be overturned, or that he be granted clemency and restored to the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7.
2. The applicant states that he does not argue in any way that he was wrong to commit the offense for which he pled guilty to [Article 92, UCMJ Failure to Obey Order or Regulation], but asks that the findings of guilty against him for violations of Article 121 be overturned. He also states, in effect, that the findings of guilty against him for two violations of Article 121 of the UCMJ are an error and unjust, and that the burden was not met by the government at his summary court-martial to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had the intent to permanently deprive the government of a Fleet Services credit card or money borrowed on the card, and therefore, the findings of not guilty are appropriate. He further states, in pertinent part, that he has served his country for approximately 13 years, and that in all that time, he has not had one single disciplinary problem. Additionally, he states that he truly regrets the actions that he had taken in wrongfully using the Fleet Services credit card, that he has learned from his mistakes, and requests that he be restored to the rank of SFC/E-7 with a date of rank of 1 August 2006 or that he be granted clemency to grant this relief.
3. The applicant provides a self-authored memorandum, dated 23 October 2008; a DD Form 2329 (Record of Trail by Summary Court-Martial); a DD Form 458 (Charge Sheet), initially dated 7 May 2007; two sworn statements, dated
9 and 17 November 2006, from a Soldier with the last name of Tarver; a sworn statement, dated 20 September 2006, from a Soldier with the last name of Williams; a self-authored sworn statement, dated 9 November 2006; an Internal Revenue Service Form 1040 (U.S. Individual Income Tax Return for 2006); and a check, dated 8 May 2005, from the applicant to the General Services Administration in the amount of $1,621.80 in support of this application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20080004463, on 10 July 2008.
2. The applicant requested that reconsideration be given to his request that the findings of guilty against him for two violations of Article 121 of the UCMJ in his court-martial conviction be overturned. However, as noted in the previous ABCMR proceedings, Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, as amended, does not permit any redress by this Board that would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction. The Board is empowered to address the punishment resulting from a court-martial conviction. The Board may elect to change the punishment 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. As a result, reconsideration of the applicant's request that the findings of guilty against him for two violations of Article 121 of the UCMJ in his court-martial conviction be overturned will not be discussed further in these proceedings.
3. The applicant stated that he has served his country for approximately
13 years, and that in all that time, he has not had one single disciplinary problem. He also stated that he truly regrets the actions that he had taken in wrongfully using the Fleet Services credit card, and that he has learned from his mistakes. He further requested that he be granted clemency.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The ABCMR does not have the jurisdiction to change the charges, specifications, or findings of a court-martial. However, it is empowered to change a sentence of a court-martial if clemency is determined to be appropriate to moderate the severity of the sentence imposed.
2. The applicant's request for reconsideration for clemency was considered, as was his entire record of service. However, by wrongfully using a government credit card to purchase gasoline and car washes for unofficial business, and stealing money to purchase goods for his personal use, the applicant, then an SFC, severely compromised the trust and confidence placed in him as a senior noncommissioned officer (NCO). As a senior NCO, he had the duty to support and abide by the Army's policies. By committing the aforementioned offenses, the applicant knowingly risked a military career, violated the trust and confidence placed in him as a senior NCO, and undoubtedly caused an adverse impact on his chain of command. Notwithstanding the applicant's contentions, he was not submitted sufficient evidence to show that clemency is warranted in this case. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting relief to the applicant in this case.
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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20080004463, dated 10 July 2008.
________XXX______________
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) AR20080016931
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080016931
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022726
The applicant stated the leadership of the unit failed on numerous occasions to discipline problem Soldiers, leading to a breakdown of morale. d. One Soldier, Private First Class (PFC) M________, was known as a problem Soldier. On 23 January 2007, the applicant appealed the SCM sentence.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007424
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant also states that COL (Ret) C____u ordered a United States Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC, also known as CID) investigation of his appeal in the 1983/1984 time period. A DD Form 149, dated 30 April 1984, shows the applicant requested consideration by the ABCMR for correction of all military records to reflect that all findings of guilty to the charges and specifications set forth in Department of the Army,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018593
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 15 September 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140018593 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he completed 1 year, 8 months, and 20 days of active service during this period. c. The evidence of record shows the applicant's case was referred to a general court-martial.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007968
Counsel requests correction of the applicant's records as follows: * set aside the punishment imposed by Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 22 February 2011 * removal of the DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) from the performance section of his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) * retroactive promotion to sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 2. COL RHL alleged the applicant was AWOL from his unit from 23 November 2010 until 19 January 2011, in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012055
The applicant requests reconsideration of his request for removal of a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) and the General Officer Punitive Letter of Reprimand (PLOR) be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or placed in the restricted section of this OMPF. A sworn statement dated 10 December 2002, from SFC R--------r, that states that on or about 2 November 2002, he counseled the applicant and the female PFC regarding what he perceived as an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110004021
The applicant's claim concerning violations of his rights during the IO's investigation and the court-martial process are matters that should have been raised or may have been raised during the appeals process. There is no evidence available that indicates anything the applicant said was used against him or that it had any bearing on the SCM sentence resulting in his reduction in rank. The evidence of record shows a SCM found the applicant guilty of violating Article 93 and Article 134 of...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501311
The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “MEDICAL.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. “Dear Chairperson: After a review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of evidence assembled for review, we continue to note the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130002712
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. In his notification memorandum, he was informed of his right to request a hearing of his case before an administrative separation board. The evidence of record shows the imposing commander based the applicant's NJP on the evidence developed in the Army Regulation 15-6 investigation.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007850
The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous requests that his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded. The case was remanded back to the ACMR, and on 31 July 1987 the ACMR set aside the finding of guilty and the sentence on the remaining court-marital charge of stealing the submachine gun and authorized a rehearing on the larceny and wrongful disposition charges. Notwithstanding counsel's contention that there were no court-martial charges pending against the...
NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501430
ND05-01430 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050830. “The discharge was improper because I was coerced by my attorney to say I did steal money from the victim. The Manual for courts-martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 92 – failure to obey general order, Article 121 – larceny of value more than $100, Article 91...