Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006747
Original file (20120006747.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  2 October 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120006747 


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 his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states the drug he was found with is now legal and there is only a fine for weed [marijuana].

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentation.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 1 October 1980 and he held military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).  He was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, KY, on 27 December 1980.

3.  A U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC, also known as CID) report, dated 17 April 1981, shows the applicant was apprehended by CID on that date for selling marijuana to a confidential informant (CI) of the Joint Drug Suppression Team, Fort Campbell, KY.

4.  On 20 May 1981, court-martial charges were preferred against him for one specification each of wrongfully possessing marijuana, wrongfully transferring marijuana, and wrongfully selling marijuana on 17 April 1981.

5.  On 9 June 1981, he consulted with legal counsel who advised him of the basis for the contemplated trial by court-martial for an offense punishable by a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge, the maximum permissible punishment authorized under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the possible effects of a request for discharge, and of the procedures and rights that were available to him.  Following consultation with legal counsel, he requested discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10, for the good of the service - in lieu of trial by court-martial.

6.  In his request for discharge, he acknowledged he understood if the discharge request were approved, he might be discharged under other than honorable conditions and be furnished an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  He also acknowledged he understood he might be deprived of many or all Army benefits, he might be ineligible for many or all benefits administered by the Veterans Administration, he might be deprived of his rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State laws, and he might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life.

7.  On 11 June 1981, his immediate commander recommended approval of his request for a discharge with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  

8.  On 11 and 12 June 1981 respectively, his intermediate and senior commander recommended approval of his request for a discharge with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.  

9.  On 29 June 1981, the separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service and directed the issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate.
10.  On 1 July 1981, he was discharged accordingly.  The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged by reason of conduct triable by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service.  He completed 9 months and 1 day of net active service.

11.  There is no evidence the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

12.  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 included a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred.  Although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

13.  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.

14.  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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of offenses punishable under the UCMJ with a punitive discharge.  Discharges under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, are voluntary requests for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  As such, he voluntarily requested a discharge to avoid a trial by court-martial.  His separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would have jeopardized his rights.

2.  He contends his discharge should be upgraded because the possession and selling of marijuana is no longer illegal.  However, this contention is neither valid nor true.  Possession, use, and sale of marijuana was illegal at the time of his service and remains so today.

3.  His record of service shows he was charged with possessing, transferring, and selling an illegal drug.  Based on this record of misconduct, his service clearly did not meet the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel.  This misconduct rendered his service unsatisfactory.  Therefore, he is not entitled to an honorable or 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 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)                                         AR20120006747





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120006747



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001620

    Original file (20140001620.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 8 January 1982, the separation authority approved his request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service and directed the issuance of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions Discharge Certificate. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006337

    Original file (20130006337.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable discharge. In addition, his records contain the DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued that shows he was discharged on 10 February 1982, in the rank of PVT, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for conduct triable by court-martial with an under other than honorable conditions characterization of service. The evidence of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100030229

    Original file (20100030229.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests an upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to an honorable 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 | CY2012 | 20120021312

    Original file (20120021312.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Soldiers who told U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CID) investigators that they bought drugs from him were already in trouble and were falsely accusing him so their charges would be reduced or dismissed. On 15 September 1980, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and he voluntarily requested 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. ...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100026938

    Original file (20100026938.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 March 1981, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge and directed that he be discharged UOTHC. On 21 February 1997, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of his 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 | CY2014 | 20140015936

    Original file (20140015936.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was discharged from the Army on 29 October 1982. This form further shows his character of service as bad conduct. Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000662

    Original file (20080000662.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to honorable. On 19 February 1982, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service, conduct triable by court-martial, with a discharge UOTHC. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012845

    Original file (20080012845.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with Title 10, United States Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records is not empowered to set aside a conviction. 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 an honorable or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707443C070209

    Original file (9707443C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 October 1975, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for wrongfully possessing marijuana. On 11 January 1977, the applicant was discharged, with a discharge UOTHC, in pay grade E-1 for the good of the service. Chapter 10 of that 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 the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002006

    Original file (20120002006.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 July 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120002006 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to honorable. Headquarters, U.S. Army Infantry Center and Fort Benning, Special Court-Martial Order Number 111, dated 17 October 1983, shows the applicant's approved sentence to reduction to pay grade E-1, confinement at hard labor for 3 months, forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 3 months, and discharge...