Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001661
Original file (20140001661.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		
		BOARD DATE:   28 August 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140001661 


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 (BCD) be upgraded to a general discharge and the reason for his separation be changed.

2.  The applicant states his behavior and conduct drastically changed after returning from deployment to Iraq.  At the time, his age, inexperience in a war type environment, and his suffering due to the loss of fellow battle buddies had more of an impact upon him than he could comprehend.  He turned to drugs and drinking which further impacted his mental capacity as he attempted to cope upon his return to the States.  He suffers from nightmares and anger problems.  He went to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to seek help.  His discharge has hindered his ability to further investigate and properly diagnose his present state.  Both his brothers served and his eldest brother was diagnosed with a 70 percent disability due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).  

3.  The applicant provides:

* his Florida Certification of Birth
* Social Security Administration Social Security Number Printout
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* a letter from his mother



CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 January 2005.  He was 
17 years old.  He held military occupational specialty 94A (Land Combat Electronic Missile System Repairer).

2.  He was convicted by a general court-martial, conducted on 12 February and 26 March 2009, in accordance with his pleas, of violation of the following articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ):

* Article 86, by failing to go to his assigned place of duty and by being absent without leave (AWOL)  
* Article 90, by willfully disobeying a command given by a commissioned officer and by willfully striking the commissioned officer
* Article 91, by willfully disobeying a lawful order from a noncommissioned officer (NCO) and by wrongfully striking three NCO's
* Article 112a, by wrongfully using marijuana
* Article 134, by wrongfully entering the barracks room of another Soldier
* Article 95, by escaping from confinement

3.  The court sentenced him to a reduction to private/E-1, confinement for 
18 months, and a BCD. 

4.  General Court-Martial Order Number 22, Headquarters, U.S. Army Accessions Command and Fort Knox, Fort Knox, Kentucky, dated 18 March 2011, shows the sentence was affirmed.  Article 71(c) of the UCMJ having been complied with, the BCD was ordered executed.

5.  The applicant was discharged on 12 May 2011, with a BCD.  He had completed 6 years and 14 days of creditable active service.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal, National Defense Service Medal, and the Army Service Ribbon.  Lost time is shown as 
16 December 2008 to 2 January 2009 and from 3 January to 9 April 2009. 

6.  He provided a letter in which his mother describes how the applicant entered the Army immediately after high school graduation and did well.  Upon his return from his deployment to Iraq he had changed.  His life, as he knew it, was never the same.  He behaved strangely.  She feels he was too young for what he experienced.  It's like the military takes young Soldiers who are on the straight and narrow and when they take a turn for the worse they are simply discarded.  His discharge should be changed so he can get help from the VA. 

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

8.  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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records 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 applicant contends his BCD should be upgraded because his behavior and conduct drastically changed after returning from his deployment to Iraq.  At the time he received the BCD he was young, inexperienced, and he was suffering due to the loss of fellow battle buddies.

2.  The evidence shows the applicant was 17 years old when he enlisted in the Army, but he was over 21 years old at the time of the offenses that resulted in his court-martial.

3.  His trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  The conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the applicant's discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted.

4.  There is no available evidence that is sufficiently convincing to show his misconduct was the result of any medical or mental illness received as a result of his service in Iraq.

5.  In view of the above, the applicant's request 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)                                         AR20100010650



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140001661



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090010095

    Original file (20090010095.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    While on leave, he spent as much time as he could with his brother. He has been out of the Army since 2006. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022917

    Original file (20120022917.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant, through civilian counsel, requests that the Board exercise clemency and upgrade his bad conduct discharge (BCD). Counsel requests that the Board exercise clemency and upgrade the applicant's BCD. 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.

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1001825

    Original file (MD1001825.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Types of Documents Submitted/reviewedRelated to Military Service: DD 214:Service/Medical Record:Other Records: Related to Post-Service Period: Employment: Finances: Education/Training: Health/Medical Records: Rehabilitation/Treatment: Criminal Records: Personal Documentation: Community Service: References: Department of VA letter: Other Documentation: Additional Statements:From Applicant: From/To Representation:From/ToCongress member: Pertinent Regulation/Law A. Paragraph 6210, MISCONDUCT ,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120013067

    Original file (AR20120013067.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 August 2009, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, unconditionally waived his right to an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed action and recommended approval of the separation with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022530

    Original file (20120022530.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    (No medical records provided to substantiate this statement) 12 December 2006 He tested positive for marijuana. The fact that the applicant suffered from mental health issues is not in question; however the medical treatment timeline and partial medical records provided by his counsel are insufficient evidence to show that the Army failed to provide timely and adequate medical treatment to the applicant or to show that he was not properly diagnosed. The applicant and his counsel further...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017969

    Original file (20130017969.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence shows that on 23 June 2010 during the applicant's third deployment to Afghanistan, his commanding officer referred him for a mental health evaluation based on receipt of reports of his driving erratically and striking a pedestrian while allegedly under the influence of alcohol on 22 June 2010. On 25 January 2011, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of the charges and was sentenced to a reduction to pay grade E-7. There is no evidence of record and neither the applicant...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110019428

    Original file (AR20110019428.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Board Decision Board Vote: Character - Change 0 No change 5 Reason - Change 0 No change 5 (Board member names available upon request) X.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130009567

    Original file (20130009567.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant, the brother of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests an upgrade of his late brother's under other than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge. On 4 June 1971, the appropriate separation authority approved the FSM’s requests under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, and directed the issuance of an Undesirable Discharge Certificate and reduction to...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110020388

    Original file (AR20110020388.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Discharge Under Review Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 060515 Discharge Received: Date: 060601 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: ????? Army policy states that although an honorable or general, under honorable conditions discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011661

    Original file (20080011661.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to a general discharge under honorable conditions. It is also noted that twice the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment while in Vietnam, that twice he was hospitalized for heroin use, and that during the second half of his Vietnam tour his conduct and efficiency were rated as “satisfactory.” 4. It is acknowledged that the evidence of record indicated the applicant’s misconduct started after he was wounded in action.