IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 19 May 2011
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100028201
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 bad conduct discharge to honorable.
2. The applicant states the upgrade is required due to his medical conditions at the time. He had surgery on his leg which caused his inability to serve his full term.
3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) and the front page of his induction physical and back page of his separation physical.
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 records show he underwent an induction physical and he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 9 April 1969. He was subsequently reassigned to Fort Benning, GA, for completion of basic combat training.
3. On 24 May 1969, he departed his training unit in an absent without leave (AWOL) status, but he returned on 28 May 1969.
4. On 12 July 1969, he again departed his unit in an AWOL status and he was dropped from the Army rolls as a deserter on 10 August 1969. He returned to military control on 28 August 1969 and was placed in pretrial confinement.
5. On 8 September 1969, he was convicted by a special court-martial of one specification of AWOL from 12 July to 28 August 1969. The court sentenced him to confinement at hard labor for 3 months and a forfeiture of $25.00 pay per month for 3 months. On 18 September 1969, the convening authority approved the sentence, but he suspended the confinement for a period of 3 months with a provision for automatic remission.
6. On 9 September 1969, he again departed his unit in an AWOL status and he returned to military control on 18 September 1969. He was again placed in pretrial confinement.
7. On 26 September 1969, he was convicted by a special court-martial of one specification of AWOL from 9 to 18 September 1969. The court sentenced him to confinement at hard labor for 45 days and a forfeiture of $10.00 pay per month for 2 months. On 10 October 1969, the convening authority approved the sentence.
8. On 15 October 1969, he again departed his unit in an AWOL status and he was dropped from the Army rolls as a deserter on 19 November 1969. He returned to military control on 25 March 1970.
9. On 28 April 1970, he was convicted by a general court-martial of one specification of AWOL from 15 October 1969 to 24 March 1970. The court sentenced him to confinement at hard labor for 1 year and 1 month and a bad conduct discharge.
10. On 19 June 1970, the convening authority approved the sentence and, except for the bad conduct discharge, he ordered it executed. The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for review by the U.S. Army Court of Military Review.
11. On 10 November 1970, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence.
12. On 4 December 1970, he underwent a separation physical at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, KS. The attending physician did not note any abnormalities.
13. He was discharged from the Army on 9 December 1970. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 11 of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) as a result of court-martial with an under conditions other than honorable character of service. It further shows he completed 3 months and 5 days of creditable active service and he had 513 days of lost time.
14. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
a. 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.
b. 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.
15. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. In accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the ABCMR 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. The applicant contends his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded to honorable.
2. The evidence of record shows his trial by a general court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense charged. The conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and his discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which he was convicted. By law, the Board is only empowered to change a discharge if clemency is determined to be appropriate to moderate the severity of the sentence imposed.
3. There is no evidence in his records and he did not provide substantiating evidence that shows his extensive history of AWOL was a result of a medical condition. Furthermore, the evidence of record shows that at the time of his discharge he underwent a separation physical and no abnormalities were noted. There is no evidence that shows he had a medical condition requiring a medical separation.
4. After a careful review of the applicant's entire record of service, it is clear his service did not meet the criteria for an honorable or a general discharge. As a result, he is not entitled to an upgrade of his discharge.
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 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) AR20100028201
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100028201
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023241
BOARD DATE: 10 May 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110023241 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 18 January 1971 with an under other than honorable conditions character of service. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019101
On 31 December 1970, the convening authority approved the sentence, and except for the bad conduct discharge, the sentence was ordered executed. The applicant was discharged from the Army on 24 May 1971 with an under other than honorable conditions discharge and he was issued a Bad Conduct Discharge Certificate. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020899
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 March 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100020899 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 28 April 1971, he was discharged under the provisions of chapter 2, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Separations), for Other Than Desertion (Court-Martial), with a BCD, in pay grade E-1. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, stated a general discharge was a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056014C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. 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: An upgrade of a soldier’s discharge may be warranted if the Board determines that the discharge was in error or unjust.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089503C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT STATES : That he was only 17 years old when he enlisted in the Army and that he was initially not accepted for enlistment due to medical reasons. Title 10, United Stated Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, provides, in pertinent part, that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to set aside a conviction.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011693
The applicant requests, in effect, that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded. 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. In general, a pardon is granted on the basis of the petitioner's demonstrated good conduct for a substantial period of time after conviction and service of sentence.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012160
When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Upon successful completion a clemency discharge would be issued. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a general discharge or an honorable discharge.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005298
On 14 May 1979, the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) reviewed the applicant's military records and all other available evidence and denied the applicant's request for a change in the character and reason of 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. Ann M. Campbell ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012687
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 November 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100012687 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 22 January 1971, the General Court-Martial Convening Authority (GCMCA) approved the sentence and forwarded the record of trial to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for review by the Court of Military Review. The conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008857
The evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted by three special courts-martial for lengthy periods of AWOL. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which he was convicted. _______ _ 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.