Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000891
Original file (20140000891.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  28 August 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140000891 


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 bad conduct discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.  

2.  The applicant states he completed all of his active duty service.  He was advised, by military counsel, to plead guilty.  He was not guilty.

3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence. 

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 18 March 1980 and held military occupational specialty 11H (Heavy Anti-Armor Weapons Infantryman).  The highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four (SP4)/E-4.

3.  The complete facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant's court-martial and subsequent discharge are not available for review in this case.  However, his record does contain:

	a.  Special Court-Martial (SPCM) Order Number 78, issued by Headquarters, 8th Infantry Division (Mechanized), Germany, on 23 June 1983 that shows that, in accordance with his plea, he was convicted of wrongfully possessing three pipes that were used to smoke marijuana in the hashish form, possession of 39.94 grams of marijuana in the hashish form, selling marijuana in the hashish form to Private First Class (PFC) JJG, and distributing marijuana in the hashish form to PFC JJG.  The sentence, adjudged on 23 May 1983, included a bad conduct discharge, confinement at hard labor for 2 months, forfeiture of $382.00 of pay per month for 2 months, and reduction to grade of E-1.

	b.  SPCM Order Number 41, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Fort Dix, NJ, on 30 March 1984, ordered the sentence duly executed.

4.  Accordingly, on 18 May 1984, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 3, as a result of a court-martial with a bad conduct discharge.  His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty) shows he completed 4 years and 12 days of creditable active service with 50 days of time lost.

5.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.

	a.  Paragraph 3-11 states 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 sentence affirmed before it can be duly executed.

	b.  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.

	c.  Paragraph 3-7b states 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.

6.  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 evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted by an SPCM of possessing, selling, and distributing illegal drugs.  His trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  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.

2.  He provided no evidence to show his discharge or the court's decision to find him guilty is unjust or as a result of improper actions.  There is no apparent error 
or injustice in his record.  There is also no evidence his court-martial was unjust or inequitable.  He has not provided sufficient evidence or argument to show his discharge should be upgraded.  He was properly discharged in accordance with pertinent regulations with due process and with no violation of his rights.

3.  Any redress by this Board of the finality of a court-martial conviction is prohibited 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.  Absent any mitigating factors, the type of discharge directed and the reasons were appropriate.  As a result, clemency is not warranted in this case.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant an honorable or 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 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)                                         AR20140000891





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140000891



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100011568

    Original file (20100011568.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, he states in 1989 he was medically diagnosed and treated for schizophrenia and now he believes his bad behavior on active duty was the result of this undiagnosed illness. The applicant contends his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded to a general discharge based on the passage of time, his certification as a nurse assistant since his discharge, and his medical diagnosis of schizophrenia. __________X__ ____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002767

    Original file (20090002767.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. He was 20 years of age at the time of his assignment to Germany and he was 21 years of age at time of his drug offenses. Given the seriousness of the offenses for which he was convicted, his record was not considered sufficiently meritorious to warrant clemency in this case.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019421

    Original file (20140019421.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Special Court-Martial Order Number 28, dated 11 February 1983, issued by the U.S. Army Training Center and Fort Dix, shows the applicant's conviction and sentence were affirmed and the convening authority ordered his bad conduct discharge executed. There is no evidence he applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. His conviction, confinement, and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006948

    Original file (20080006948.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 March 1983, the applicant was discharged from the Army pursuant to the sentence of a special court-martial and he was issued a BCD. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. The applicant has not provided evidence to show that his discharge was unjust or evidence sufficient to mitigate the character of his discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000891

    Original file (20110000891.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 February 1982, a special court-martial convicted the applicant of wrongfully having in his possession 0.54 grams, more or less, of a habit-forming narcotic drug, heroin. Special Court-Martial Order Number 277, dated 6 November 1982, shows the sentence was affirmed. He was also convicted by a special court-martial of possessing heroin.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001443

    Original file (20080001443.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to honorable. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090006947

    Original file (20090006947.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The orders show the general court-martial convening authority approved the sentence and directed that, except for the bad conduct discharge, the sentence be executed. The records of the FBI are under the jurisdiction of that agency and the Board does not have the authority to direct that they correct those records. While the applicant is correct that the findings of the drug charges should also include the final disposition of the charges on the FBI RAP sheet, the Board does not have the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021189

    Original file (20120021189.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    BOARD DATE: 27 June 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120021189 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 18 February 1983, the applicant was dishonorably discharged from the Army. The 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 | CY2015 | 20150001127

    Original file (20150001127.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests an upgrade of his bad conduct discharge to a general discharge under honorable conditions. 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. His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021800

    Original file (20110021800.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 July 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110021800 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was discharged from the Regular Army on 28 January 1986 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), chapter 3, due to court-martial. The applicant contends that his bad conduct discharge should be upgraded to honorable and the reason for discharge should be changed to ETS because none of the offenses were...