IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 21 January 2010
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090014301
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 that his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a more favorable discharge.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that he cannot remember the circumstances that led to his BCD; however, he knows it was drug related and that he did not have any or use any. He goes on to state that he requested a drug test and was not given one and that people spoke for him at his court-martial. He also states he was convicted and served his time. He continues by stating that he is
52 years of age and he is trying to set things straight.
3. The applicant provides a hand-written letter of explanation and a copy of his DD Form 214 (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. The applicant was born on 1 June 1957 and enlisted in the Regular Army in Charlotte, North Carolina on 28 September 1977 for a period of 3 years, training as an infantry indirect fire crewman, and assignment to Hawaii. He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Hawaii on 20 March 1978. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 28 November 1979.
3. On 31 March 1980, he reenlisted for a period of 3 years and training as a terminal operations coordinator. He departed Hawaii on 12 August 1980 and was transferred to Fort Eustis, Virginia to undergo his training. He completed his training and remained assigned to a transportation company at Fort Eustis, Virginia.
4. On 28 July 1982, the applicant was convicted, pursuant to his pleas, by a special court-martial of the wrongful sale, transfer, and possession of 4.59 grams of marijuana; and the wrongful sale, transfer and possession of 88.84 grams of marijuana. He was sentenced to a reduction to the pay grade of E-1, a forfeiture of $367.00 pay for 2 months, confinement at hard labor for 2 months, and a BCD.
5. On 4 May 1983, orders were published that announced the findings and sentence had been affirmed and directed that the applicants BCD be executed.
6. Accordingly, on 25 March 1985, the applicant was discharged pursuant to a duly reviewed and affirmed court-martial conviction. He had served 7 years, 4 months, and 7 days of total active service and he had 51 days of lost time due to imprisonment.
7. There is no evidence in the available records to show the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that boards 15-year statute of limitations.
8. Title 10, U.S. 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 were considered; however, he has failed to show through evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record, that his discharge warrants an upgrade.
4. 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
____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) AR20090014301
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090014301
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015333
The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant states that the presumption of regularity that might normally permit the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to assume that the Army acted correctly in characterizing his service as less than honorable does not apply in his case because of the evidence he is submitting. This form further shows the applicant's character of service as bad conduct and that he completed 4...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030244
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). There is no indication that he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the final discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018639
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 March 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110018639 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Finding: Guilty * On or between 23 May and 1 June 1992, wrongfully using cocaine Plea: Guilty. The applicant could have self-referred at any time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010269
He was accordingly discharged from military service on 28 May 1981. The DD Form 214 he was issued confirms that he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) with a bad conduct discharge as a result of Court-Martial. 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 | 20120010607
On 21 April 1975, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 11-2, that states a member will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial, after completion of appellate review and after such affirmed sentence has been ordered duly executed. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012208
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his Bad Conduct Discharge. Army Regulation 15-185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. There is no evidence of record and the applicant provides insufficient evidence to support his claim that his discharge should be upgraded.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120001119
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 July 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120001119 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 13. Accordingly, his punishment was not disproportionate to the offense for which he was convicted and he has failed to show sufficient evidence or reasons to warrant an upgrade of his discharge based on clemency.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008901
The applicant requests correction of his military records by removing the general court-martial record he received in 1987. 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. _______ _ _x______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006004
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). He was used by the upper authorities in the service, he was tried, and then convicted. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008527
On 18 October 1990, he went AWOL and remained absent until he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Leavenworth on 15 January 1991 and was transferred to Fort Eustis. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The applicants contentions have been noted; however, he has failed to show through evidence submitted with his application or...