Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021480
Original file (20110021480.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  26 April 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110021480 


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 discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions.

2.  The applicant states he was misrepresented at the time and he has been a law-abiding citizen.

3.  The applicant provides 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 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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 August 1983 for a period of 3 years and training as an infantryman.  He completed one-station unit training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and was transferred to Fort Polk, Louisiana, for his first duty assignment.

3.  On 27 November 1984, charges were preferred against him for being disrespectful in language towards a superior noncommissioned officer, wrongfully using marijuana, and two specifications of disobeying a lawful order from a superior commissioned officer.

4.  On 25 January 1985 after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10.  He indicated he was making the request of his own free will without coercion from anyone and he was aware of the implications attached to his request.  He also admitted he was guilty of the charges against him or of lesser-included offenses which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  He acknowledged he understood he could receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions and he might be deprived of all benefits as a result of such a discharge.  He also elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

5.  The appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request for discharge on 28 January 1985 and directed his discharge under other than honorable conditions.

6.  On 20 February 1985, he was discharged for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, with an under other than honorable conditions character of service.  He completed 1 year, 5 months, and 28 days of active service.

7.  There is no evidence in the available records to show he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 
15-year statute of limitations.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial at any time after charges have been preferred.  A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against him or her or of lesser-included offenses which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge and he or she must indicate he or she has been briefed and understands the consequences of such a request as well as the discharge he or she might receive.  A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

9.  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.  A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier's separation specifically allows such characterization.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations.  Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate under the circumstances.

2.  After being afforded the opportunity to assert his innocence before a trial by court-martial, he voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in hopes of avoiding a punitive discharge and having a felony conviction on his record.  In doing so he admitted guilt to the charges against him.

3.  The applicant's contentions have been noted.  However, they are not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief under the circumstances, especially given the nature of his misconduct and the absence of mitigating circumstances at the time.  Additionally, he failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application and the evidence of record that he was misrepresented.  His service simply did not rise to the level of a general 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)                                         AR20110021480



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110021480



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004256

    Original file (20120004256.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to an honorable discharge. There is no evidence in his records nor does he provide evidence which shows he requested a transfer or was misrepresented at any time throughout his service or the separation process. There is no evidence in his records nor does he provide evidence which shows he requested a transfer or was misrepresented at any time throughout his service or the separation process.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003568

    Original file (20140003568.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter 10 provides that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial at any time after charges have been preferred. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against him or her or of a lesser-included offense which authorizes the imposition of a bad conduct or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006881

    Original file (20120006881.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000730

    Original file (20110000730.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 July 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he receive a discharge under other than honorable conditions. The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he completed a total of 3 years and 2 months of creditable active service with no lost time. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003812C070206

    Original file (20050003812C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Chapter 10 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002552

    Original file (20140002552 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a fully honorable discharge. On 1 October 1987, the appropriate authority (a major general) approved his request for discharge and directed the applicant be given an under other than honorable conditions discharge. There is no evidence in the available records to show that he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060007606C070205

    Original file (20060007606C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to a more favorable discharge. 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. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against them or of a lesser included offense which authorizes the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130016592

    Original file (20130016592.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his undesirable discharge to honorable. On 5 November 1984 after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant submitted a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10. A condition of submitting such a request is that the individual concerned must admit guilt to the charges against him or her or of a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000898

    Original file (20090000898.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, that his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge (HD). A UOTHC discharge normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006861

    Original file (20140006861.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 August 1985, he consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 due to charges being preferred against him under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) which authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. There is no evidence indicating he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his...