IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 14 April 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100023697
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 honorable or general.
2. The applicant states he was simply defending himself from a higher ranking Soldier who struck him first. He did agree to a plea bargain arrangement, but now he would like the record to reflect the truth. He says he knows what took place.
3. The applicant provides no supporting documents.
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. Following 4 months of initial active duty for training and about a year in the Army National Guard, the applicant was involuntarily ordered to active duty on 23 February 1976.
3. A special court-martial found the applicant guilty of assault with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm by striking a specialist four in the face with a chair, possession of marijuana, and failure to obey a lawful general regulation by entering the women's barracks. The adjudged sentence was confinement for 4 months, forfeiture of $240 pay per month for 4 months and a BCD.
4. The findings and sentence were approved as adjudged.
5. On 23 November 1976 the Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings and sentence. The United States Court of Military Appeals declined to review the case.
6. Article 71(c) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice having been complied with the sentenced BCD was ordered executed on 23 February 1977.
7. The applicant was discharged on 22 March 1977. The applicant had 1 year and 5 days creditable active duty service and 146 days lost time.
8. There is no indication that the applicant appealed to the Army Discharge Review Board.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant states he was simply defending himself. He did agree to a plea bargain arrangement, but now he would like the record to reflect the truth.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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) AR20100023697
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100023697
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090014704
The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to an under honorable conditions (general) discharge. At the time of his discharge he had completed 3 years, 10 months, and 28 days of net active service during the period of service under review. After a thorough and comprehensive review of the applicant's military service record, it is concluded that based on the seriousness of the offenses for which he was convicted, clemency is not appropriate.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013686
- IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140013686 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge. His service medical records were not available for review.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002441
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. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a general discharge or an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007784
The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to an honorable or a general discharge. Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, an undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate at the time of the applicants discharge. ____________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 | CY2007 | 20070002873C071029
The resulting approved sentence was a BCD. Given his undistinguished record of service and the severity of the offenses for which he was convicted, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support clemency in this case. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018925
On 22 October 1976, in a pretrial agreement, the applicant agreed to plead guilty to a violation of Article 134, assault with the intent to commit robbery, provided that the convening authority approved a sentence of no more than a bad conduct discharge and confinement at hard labor for no more than 20 months, but with no agreement as to forfeitures or reductions. On 13 January 1977, the Staff Judge Advocate, in a written review for the convening authority, summarized the evidence and trial...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002204
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 mitigating...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005599
His sentence included discharge from the Army with a BCD. The evidence of record shows the applicant accepted NJP on seven occasions for misconduct including being absent without leave. There is no evidence he was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same or of a younger age who served successfully and completed their term of service.
CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2003-144
The order indicates that on February 23, 1968, a state court placed the applicant on probation for three years after he was convicted of possessing marijuana. In 1977, the applicant applied to a Special Discharge Review Board for an VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On February 25, 2004, the Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard submitted an advisory opinion recommending that the Board waive the statute of limitations and grant partial relief in this case by upgrading the applicant’s discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 199709385C070209
Counsel states that the applicant contends that his discharge was materially and legally in error, and unjust, in that: The applicant denies that he sexually abused or assaulted his daughter; There is no direct, probative or corroborating evidence that he sexually abused his daughter; Applicants daughter never testified under oath regarding the allegations; Applicants plea of guilty was made expressly for the purpose of his wife and daughter not having to testify at a civilian criminal...