Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011693
Original file (20100011693.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  5 October 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100011693 


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 an upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant states his misconduct was not associated with military service.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 257A (General Discharge Certificate).

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.  On 22 October 1991, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 6 years, having served 4 months and 5 days of prior active service and 10 years, 11 months, and 20 days of prior inactive service.
3.  On 3 April 1994, the applicant was convicted by a civil court in Okaloosa County, FL for sexual activity with a child in familial authority, and lewd and lascivious acts upon a child under 16 years of age.  He was sentenced to
15 years supervised probation, each count concurrent.

4.  On 1 June 1994, the company commander notified the applicant that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, paragraph 14-5, for conviction by a civil court.  The company commander stated that the reason for his recommendation for elimination was the applicant's conviction by a civil court.

5.  On 1 June 1994, the applicant acknowledged that he was in receipt of the notification of separation action against him.  The applicant voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board contingent upon him receiving a characterization of service no less than general under honorable conditions.  He also waived his rights to representation by defense counsel.  The applicant elected not to submit statements in his own behalf.  The applicant also acknowledged he understood that he may expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge is issued to him.

6.  The appropriate authority approved the applicant’s separation under the provision Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14 paragraph 14-5, conviction by a civil court, and directed the issuance of a general discharge.

7.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows he was discharged on 14 July 1994 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct.  At the time he had completed
7 months and 24 days of net active service this period.

8.  On 13 January 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of the applicant's service were both proper and equitable.  Therefore, the board unanimously voted to deny the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his discharge.

9.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14 establishes policy and prescribes procedures for separating members for misconduct.  Specific categories include minor disciplinary infractions, a pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, and convictions by civil authorities.  Action will be taken to separate a member for misconduct when it is clearly established that rehabilitation is impracticable or is unlikely to succeed.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter.  However, the separation authority may direct a general discharge if such is merited by the Soldier’s overall record.  Only a general court-martial convening authority may approve an honorable discharge or delegate approval authority for an honorable discharge under this provision of regulation.

10.  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.

11.  Army Regulation 600-20 (Army Command Policy) prescribes policy on basic responsibilities of command, military discipline and conduct.  It states, in pertinent part, that the standards of conduct for members of the Armed Forces regulate a member's life 24 hours each day beginning at the moment the member enters the military status and not ending until the person is discharged or otherwise separated from the Armed Forces.  It further states those standards of conduct, including the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), apply to a member of the Armed Forces at all times that the member has a military status, whether the member is on base or off base, and whether the member is on duty or off duty.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his general discharge should be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

2.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.

3.  His record of indiscipline includes a civil conviction for sexual activity with a child in familial authority, and lewd and lascivious acts upon a child under 
16 years of age.  Based on this record of indiscipline, the applicant’s service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct also renders his service unsatisfactory.

4.  Although his misconduct occurred outside of a military installation and while he was off duty it does not mitigate the fact that he was a Soldier 24 hours each day during his term of enlistment.  Therefore, his contention that he had no misconduct associated with military service is without merit.
5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

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)                                         AR20100011693



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100011693



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08202-01

    Original file (08202-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not t. In a brief attached to Petitioner's application, counsel makes the following contentions: 1910.4B; and the effect of an lectured, off the record, to change no- The provisions of the MILPERSMAN which state that a contest plea is tantamount to a conviction, and that any conviction is binding on an ADB, are without force and effect since those provisions are not set forth in Secretary of the Navy Instruction (SECNAVINST) since that directive empowers the ADB to determine...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018966

    Original file (20070018966.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. 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.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00169

    Original file (MD04-00169.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00169 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20031029. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (C and D).Issue 1: The Applicant states his discharge was “based on one incident in an otherwise clean record of service.” The military does not view the Applicant’s offense as minor infraction. At this time, the Applicant has not...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2000-00074

    Original file (BC-2000-00074.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    He submitted a request for retirement in lieu of discharge and requested a hearing before an administrative discharge board. He was not discharged from the Air Force on 21 August 2000, but rather on that date he was continued on active duty. Exhibit H. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 29 Oct 03 ROSCOE HINTON, JR. Panel Chair MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR) FROM: SAF/MR SUBJECT: AFBCMR Case on I have carefully reviewed all of the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110016018

    Original file (20110016018.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 June 1991, he was notified by his immediate commander that a board of officers had been directed to determine if he should be discharged from the Army under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations-Enlisted Personnel), chapter 14, for misconduct - civil conviction. On 7 October 1991, the separation authority approved his discharge action under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14, for misconduct and directed the issuance of an under other than honorable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007250

    Original file (20090007250.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 January 1981, the applicant was discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. There is no evidence in his records and he has not provided any evidence that shows he was beaten and raped by two fellow roommates or a sergeant.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600335

    Original file (ND0600335.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application and/or attached document/letter: “To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to request that my discharge status be changed. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029886

    Original file (20100029886.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He goes on to state that at the time he was 22 years of age and the incident for which he was charged occurred in 1986 when he was 14 years of age. On 1 October 1997, after reviewing all of the available evidence in his case, the ADRB determined that his discharge was both proper and equitable under the circumstances and voted unanimously to deny his request for an upgrade of his discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019789

    Original file (20100019789.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Subsequent to this acknowledgement, the applicant's immediate commander recommended his discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-206 by reason of misconduct - conviction by civil court, with the issuance of an under other than honorable discharge. Accordingly, the applicant was discharged on 3 May 1994. The evidence of record shows he was convicted by a civil court of rape of his 11-year old stepdaughter and lewd molestation, both of which are serious offenses, and he was...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017724C071029

    Original file (20060017724C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. On 23 July 1980, the applicant was discharged under conditions other than honorable under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-33a(1). The applicant did not file within the 3- year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the...