Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130006200
Original file (20130006200.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    19 November 2013

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130006200 


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 reconsideration of her request to upgrade her discharge.

2.  The applicant states:

* the prior Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision is incorrect as to her military occupational specialty (MOS) and her duty assignments
* her treatment after 15 years of service, a 14-month deployment, and the death of her husband is unjust
* she did nothing wrong and has never threatened anyone
* she sat in jail for 3 months waiting for a court-martial that never occurred
* she never signed a summary court-martial or admitted guilt to all of the charges
* she admits to having been late to formation on three occasions

3.  The applicant provides an 11-page rebuttal letter and a copy of the prior ABCMR Record of Proceedings with its supporting documentation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20120005779 on 4 September 2012.

2.  On 1 December 1997, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army with prior Army National Guard and Army Reserve service.  She reenlisted on 7 August 2003 and 30 December 2008.

3.  Her Enlisted Record Brief shows her assignments as:

* MOS 71L (Administrative Specialist) from 11 December 1997 through 4 September 2003
* MOS 42L (Mail Delivery Clerk) from 5 September 2003 through 26 May 2004
* MOS 88M (Motor Transport Operator) 27 May 2004 through her date of discharge

4.  On 2 November 2009, her unit commander notified her that he was considering imposing nonjudicial punishment (NJP) against her under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for failing to go to her appointed place of duty on two separate occasions; showing contempt toward her first sergeant by disregarding his commands by continuing to walk down the hall, out of the building then driving away in her car; willfully disobeying a lawful order from her first sergeant; and making a false official statement.  She declined NJP and demanded a trial by a court-martial.

5.  The applicant was placed in pretrial confinement from 9 December 2009 through 25 March 2010.

6.  On 3 March 2010, she submitted an offer to plead guilty wherein she agreed to plead guilty to one specification of one charge in exchange for being tried by a summary court-martial.  The applicant submits copies of her counsel's appendix and page 1 of her plea offer.  The copy of the offer in her official military records bears her signature on page 2.

7.  Her command denied her plea offer and placed her in pretrial confinement pending trial by a special court-martial on all charges and specifications.

8.  On 17 March 2010 after consulting with counsel, the applicant signed a request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  She stated:

I, SGT D____ A. L____, hereby voluntarily request discharge in lieu of trial by Court-Martial under AR [Army Regulation] 635-200, Chapter 10.  I understand that I may request discharge in lieu of trial by Court-Martial because of the following charges which have been preferred against me under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which authorize the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge:

* Violation of Article 107, UCMJ, One Specification
* Violation of Article 92, UCMJ, One Specification
* Violation of Article 91, UCMJ, Two Specifications
* Violation of Article 86, UCMJ, Four Specifications

I am making this request of my own free will and have not been subjected to any coercion whatsoever by any person.  I have been advised of the implications that are attached to it.  By submitting this request for discharge, I acknowledge that I understand the elements of the offenses with which I am charged and am guilty of it or of a lesser-included offense(s) therein contained which also authorize(s) the imposition of a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge.

9.  Her chain of command approved the discharge request under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, and directed the issuance of a general discharge.

10.  On 7 April 2010, the applicant was discharged under honorable conditions under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10.  She completed 13 years, 11 months, and 15 days of total active service and 11 years, 7 months, and 14 days of inactive service.  She accrued 109 days of lost time.

11.  On 1 February 2012, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of her discharge.

12.  On 4 September 2012, the ABCMR denied the applicant's request for an upgrade of her discharge.

13.  In her request for reconsideration the applicant provides an accounting of her military work history from the date of her first enlistment in the Regular Army.  She states she is a professional social worker with a doctorate degree.  She states she has a "toxic" family situation but that situation has nothing to do with her military career.  She asks why she would risk it all by being unprofessional after working for over 15 years.  She was never charged with misconduct and never signed paperwork related to a summary court-martial.  Even after she paid over $800.00 to counsel, she never had a summary court-martial and any documentation about one was signed only by her counsel.  She has never threatened or disrespected any officer or noncommissioned officer.  Also while she was in confinement, all of her furniture, clothes, and military equipment were stolen from her off-base housing.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The incomplete listing of the history of the applicant's MOS's and duty assignments is not in error and has no bearing on the misconduct that resulted in her discharge.

2.  The applicant did, in fact, sign a request for a summary court-martial as a part of her offer to plead guilty.  This request was rejected by her command which resulted in her confinement pending a special court-martial.  The applicant submits only page 1 of the agreement followed by the counsel appendix, which bears only his signature, but not page 2 of the offer that would bear her signature.

3.  In the applicant's request for discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, she acknowledged the offenses and that she was guilty of those offenses or of lesser-included offenses.  This statement is an admission of guilt.

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20120005779, dated 4 September 2012.




      _______ _  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)                                         AR20130006200



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130006200



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005779

    Original file (20120005779.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, an upgrade of her discharge to a fully honorable discharge. On 24 March 2010, consistent with the chain of command's recommendations, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 and directed the issuance of an under honorable conditions discharge. The DD Form 214 she was issued shows she was discharged under the provisions of chapter 10 of Army Regulation 635-200 in lieu of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070004308C071029

    Original file (20070004308C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 24 October 1993, the applicant was charged with assaulting his wife. He told her he needed to call an ambulance to get her to the hospital [where she was eventually treated for nine days]. The Manual for Courts-Martial United States, Part II, Rule 401 (Forwarding and disposition of charges in general) states only persons authorized to convene courts-martial or to administer nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 may dispose of charges.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010621

    Original file (20140010621.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of his record to: * expunge his Special Court-Martial (SPCM) * upgrade his Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) to an honorable discharge * amend item 27 (Reenlistment (RE) Code) of his DD Form 214 to show he received an RE Code of "1" or "3" 2. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged with a BCD on 28 June 1983, in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 3-1 as a result of court-martial, and that he received...

  • USMC | DRB | 2007_Marine | MD0700656

    Original file (MD0700656.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    To the contrary, the Board found that the Applicant successfully, with the assistance of counsel, negotiated a pretrial agreement by which she avoided the potentially more severe consequences of a special court-martial and also avoided a characterization of service as other than honorable, the characterization normally received by Marines found guilty of illegal drug use. ” Additional Reviews : Subsequent to a document review, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012760

    Original file (20080012760.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions. On 25 May 2001, the applicant offered to plead guilty to the charge and its specification provided the convening authority did not approve any sentence of confinement in excess of 8 months. He stated that he was satisfied with the defense counsel.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130017612

    Original file (AR20130017612.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 February 2013, the General Court-Martial Convening Authority approved the waiver request, waived further rehabilitation and directed the applicant’s discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The record confirms that the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct and performance of duty by military personnel. Board Vote: Character...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004359

    Original file (20060004359.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 27 FEBRUARY 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060004359 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice) states, in pertinent part, that in any case of pretrial confinement, the commander of the person confined will provide a...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501228

    Original file (MD0501228.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Marine Corps and Secretary of the Navy denied Applicant the legally required examination of all his records prior to issuing an Other Than Honorable Discharge rendering the discharge invalid. In this case Captain M_(Applicant) “ requested ” an Honorable Discharge. SECNAV Instruction 1920.6B (on encl (1)) In this case the Marine Corps wants to separate a Marine Officer for cause with an Other Than Honorable Discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2010 | AR20100008084

    Original file (AR20100008084.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 15 December 2008, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. It is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070018925

    Original file (20070018925.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...