BOARD DATE: 10 April 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130013023
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.
2. The applicant states he believes he is being punished for something he unknowingly did. He has been unable to find meaningful work because of his discharge.
3. The applicant provides no additional evidence.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant, a specialist in the Alabama Army National Guard, was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom effective 25 October 2008.
2. On 8 September 2009 while serving in Iraq, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty of violation of Article 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for conduct which was prejudicial to good order and discipline or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the Armed Forces by possessing child pornography on his laptop computer and external hard drives.
3. The finding and adjudged sentence consisted of confinement for 36 months and a bad conduct discharge. The general court-martial convening authority approved the finding and sentence, but reduced the confinement to 15 months and, except for the bad conduct discharge, he ordered the sentence executed. He further credited the applicant with 30 days of confinement against the approved sentence to confinement.
4. The U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the finding and sentence but corrected the credited confinement to 37 days.
5. On 1 July 2010, the provisions of Article 71(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, having been complied with, the bad conduct discharge was ordered executed.
6. The applicant was discharged on 17 September 2010 due to court-martial under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 3. He completed 1 year and 3 days of net active duty service during this period and 2 years, 8 months, and 1 day of total service.
7. 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.
c. Paragraph 3-11 provides that a Soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant's trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense for which he was charged. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and his rights were protected throughout the court-martial process.
2. His claim that he is being punished for something he unknowingly did was considered; however, he pled guilty to the offense with full knowledge of the expected consequences.
3. In view of the foregoing evidence, his request for an upgrade of his discharge should be denied.
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) AR20130013023
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130013023
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090018665
Paragraph 127c, Section B stated if an accused was found guilty of an offense or offenses for none of which a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge was authorized, proof of two or more previous convictions adjudged by a court during the 3 years next preceding the commission of any offense of which the accused stands convicted would authorize a bad conduct discharge and a forfeiture of all pay and allowances. The applicant was not discharged because of a marijuana conviction. Therefore, his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021128
Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-7b, provides that a general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. Therefore, the applicant's record of service is insufficiently meritorious to warrant a general 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01634
As noted by the military judge during his court-martial, he unknowingly downloaded the files, but afterwards did not take the due diligence to delete the illegal files. We note that this Board is without authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a court-martial conviction. We considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, in view of the applicants overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge and the limited...
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 | CY2009 | 20090015175
A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows the applicant was discharged on 19 March 2003 with a bad conduct discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 3 (Character of Service/Description of Separation), section IV (Dishonorable and Bad Conduct Discharge) with the narrative reason "Court-Martial, Other." The applicant contends his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded and the narrative...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020748
The applicant requests his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. On 1 September 1999, the Army Discharge Review Board denied his request for an upgrade of his discharge and determined he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070001630
BOARD DATE: 2 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070001630 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. On 25 April 1991, the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as provided for a reduction to private, pay grade E1, total forfeitures, confinement for 12 months, and a bad conduct discharge, and except for that part of the sentence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110007982
Special Court-Martial Order Number 10, dated 9 February 2001, shows the sentence as modified by the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals was affirmed and that portion of the sentence pertaining to confinement had been served. It shows the appellate review was completed and the bad conduct discharge was ordered executed. While the applicant contends that he was set up by CID, that the ruling was unfair, and that he committed no wrong, he provided no evidence to support these contentions.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017569
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 August 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080017569 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. This document further shows the applicant had time lost under Title 10, U.S. Code, section 972, from 27 March 1992 to 26 November 1993. The evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted by a GCM and he received a BCD.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013246
On 15 July 1975, the applicant pled not guilty at a special court-martial to one specification of being AWOL during the period from on or about 6 June 1975 through on or about 11 June 1975. There is no evidence that indicates the applicant was any less mature than other Soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service. Furthermore, there is no evidence in the applicant's records and the applicant did not provide substantiating evidence that shows his extensive history...