Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018424
Original file (20140018424.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
		IN THE CASE OF:  


		BOARD DATE:  4 June 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140018424 


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 upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect:

* he was charged by civil authority with a misdemeanor crime, implying he was charged with a relatively minor offense not meriting discharge
* his superiors then unjustly forced him out of the Army

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentary 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 12 July 1977.  After completing One Station Unit Training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 13B (Cannon Crewmember).  The highest rank/grade held was specialist four/E-4.

3.  His official military personnel file contains a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 12 November 1979, which shows the applicant's duty status changed from present for duty to confined - civilian authorities (CCA) effective 12 November 1979.  Another DA Form 4187 shows the applicant returning to a status of present for duty on 8 January 1980 with Section IV (Remarks) stating dismissed without trial.

4.  A DA Form 2496 (Disposition Form), dated 28 April 1980, reflects the applicant was considered for the award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  His battalion commander disapproved him for the award based on two unspecified incidents, occurring in 1977 and 1978 as well as the fact he was, at the time, pending civilian charges for assault and other serious offenses. 

5.  On 15 August 1980, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for one specification of failing to go to his appointed place of duty.  

6.  A DA Form 4187, dated 5 September 1980, shows the applicant's duty status changed form present for duty to CCA effective 18 August 1980.  Section IV shows the applicant surrendered to a minimum security work farm to serve a 
6-month sentence.  He had been convicted of aggravated assault and assault with a deadly weapon (emphasis added).  A DA Form 4187, dated 12 November 1980, shows the applicant returning from CCA to a present for duty status effective 11 November 1980. 

7.  The applicant's discharge packet is not available for review.  There is, however, a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).  His DD Form 214 shows:

	a.  He was discharged on 3 December 1980, under the provisions of chapter 14 (Separation for Misconduct), Section III (Conviction by Civil Court), Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel).

	b.  The characterization of service is under other than honorable conditions.  The narrative reason for separation is misconduct - conviction by civil court.

	c.  He completed a total of 3 years and 2 days of net active creditable service this period, with 143 days of lost time.

	d.  He was awarded or authorized the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16).

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

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

	a.  Chapter 14, Section III, in effect at the time, states members are subject to separation under this provision when they have been convicted by civil authorities or action is taken which is tantamount to a finding of guilty, for an offense having a maximum penalty, under the UCMJ, of death or confinement for 1 year or more.

	b.  The version of the regulation currently in effect states in:

* paragraph 3-7a that an honorable discharge is given when the quality of the Soldier’s service has generally met standards of acceptable conduct and duty performance
* paragraph 3-7b 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

10.  The Manual for Courts-Martial provides the maximum punishment for offenses under the UCMJ.  Article 128 (Assault), includes both the offenses of aggravated assault and assault with a deadly weapon.  The maximum punishments are:

* aggravated assault in which grievous bodily harm is intentionally inflicted has a maximum punishment includes 10 years confinement
* aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon, if a loaded firearm, includes 8 years confinement; for other cases not involving a loaded firearm, it carries 3 years confinement

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests his under other than honorable discharge be upgraded on the basis that, although he was convicted by a civil court, the charge was a misdemeanor, implying it was a minor offense.  His available record, however, contradicts what he contends.

	a.  His records contain a DA Form 4187 stating he was convicted by civil authority for aggravated assault and assault with a deadly weapon.

	b.  A discharge under the provisions of Section III, Army Regulation 635-200 requires the charge for which a Soldier is convicted carry a sentence of either death or confinement for 1 year or more.

	c.  Both offenses for which the applicant was convicted show maximum sentences that exceed 1 year in confinement.

2.  The applicant's discharge packet is not available for review.  Nonetheless, there is no evidence submitted by the applicant or from any other source which shows he was not properly and equitably discharged in accordance with the regulations in effect at the time.  Absent evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes regularity and that actions taken by the Army are administratively correct.  Therefore, it is presumed that the requirements of law and regulations were adhered to and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. 

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence to support the relief requested.

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)                                         AR20140018424





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140018424



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013342

    Original file (20140013342.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He also requests correction of item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show that he held the rank/pay grade of private (PV2)/E-2 with an effective date of 26 September 1991 at the time of discharge. On 25 May 1993, the applicant was notified by his unit commander that separation action was being initiated against him under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel),...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009074

    Original file (20060009074.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The lawyer further indicated that the military’s determination that the applicant’s 1995 misdemeanor convictions constituted a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” under the Lautenberg Amendment was an error. This regulation states that the Domestic Violence Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968 (Section 922, Title 18, United States Code), the Lautenberg Amendment, makes it unlawful for any person to transfer, issue, sell or otherwise dispose of firearms or ammunition to any person...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009227

    Original file (20090009227.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to an honorable or general discharge. The applicant essentially states that he was arrested and convicted of first degree armed robbery in 1977 in the State of Washington, but since that time he has no criminal history. However, the applicant was not awarded a personal decoration which might have warranted a general discharge, and his record of misconduct so far outweighs his record of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02548

    Original file (BC-2003-02548.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLS/JAJM recommend denial and stated that the applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the court- martial. For the Air Force to provide the applicant relief, the conviction would have to be set aside. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003- 02548 in Executive Session on 29...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023518

    Original file (20110023518.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant further states he was court-martialed, but only for assault and battery, not aggravated assault; there was no felony conviction. on the head with his fist * although he was charged with "unlawfully grab B.M. The applicant was charged with the above five assaults and was tried before a general court-martial on 23 February 2005.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000223

    Original file (20110000223.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests upgrade of his under other than honorable conditions discharge to a general discharge. On 21 March 2008, he was advised by consulting counsel of the basis for the contemplated action to separate him for conviction by a civil court under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations), chapter 14, and its effects, the rights available to him, and the effect of a waiver of his rights. As a result, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014826C070206

    Original file (20050014826C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 17 June 1975, the applicant’s unit commander submitted a recommendation for the applicant’s discharge under the provisions of paragraph 33a of Army Regulation 635-206 (Personnel Separations), by reason of civil conviction. The applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions on 21 December 1976 under the provision of section VI of Army Regulation 635-206, by reason of civil conviction. There is no evidence that the applicant applied for the Army Discharge Review Board for...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600934

    Original file (ND0600934.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Decisional Issues Equity – Isolated incident Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 20010327 - 20010615ELS USNR...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070000602C071029

    Original file (20070000602C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Paragraph 4-23b(2) of Army Regulation 600-20 states, in part, that a qualifying conviction is a State or Federal conviction for a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. Paragraph 4-23d (1) of Army Regulation 600-20 states that enlistment of applicants with a qualifying conviction is prohibited and no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008623

    Original file (20090008623.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military records show that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 16 July 1962. The applicant's claim that he was awarded the Purple Heart for being wounded in Vietnam was considered. The evidence of record shows the applicant was convicted of robbery with a firearm in the first degree and sentenced to 5 years of confinement by a civil court.