Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999024585
Original file (AR1999024585.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
PART II - APPLICATION DATA

(Note: Part I deleted under the Privacy Act on Reading Room copy)

1. Character of Discharge: UOHC

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 881201

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 10, AR 635-200

         b. Reason: For the Good of the Service-In Lieu of Court-Martial

4. Prior review(s): NONE



PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review


1.       Service data: 2. Awards and decorations:
                           ARCOM
a. Period entered for: 4 Years AAM(2) (NIF)
b. Entry date: 851216 GCMDL(3)
c. Age: 29 Years DOB: 560325 NCOPDR(3)
d. Educational level: HS Grad OSR(3)
e. Aptitude area score: L/A
         GT: 98 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E6
2 Years 11 Months 16 Days

4. Performance evaluations:
See OMPF


PART III - SERVICE HISTORY
SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review - Continued

5. Periods of unauthorized absence: NONE

Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL

         Mil conf

         Civil conf

         Other


6. Nonjudicial punishment: NONE

         Date     Offense(s)
        


7. Court-Martial data: NONE

         a. SCM:
                 
Date Offense(s)

        
         b. SPCM:
                 
Date Offense(s)


         c. GCM: 
                 
Date Offense(s)


8.       Remarks: During the review of this case it was discovered that the applicant had earned awards that were not recorded in the DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) issued him at discharge. However, correction of the awards portion of the DD Form 214 is not within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB). The ADRB may only change the characterization or reason for discharge. If the applicant wishes to pursue correction of this possible error he should make application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records utilizing the DD Form l49 enclosed.

SECTION B - Prior Service Data

Other discharge(s):

         Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         RA 790308 820117 HD
         RA 820118 851215 HD





PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT
l. Facts and Circumstances:

         a. The evidence of record shows that on 21 July 1988, a court-martial charge was preferred against the applicant for violation of Articles 121 and 134 of the UCMJ. The first charge was for stealing assorted jewelry on or about 13 April 1988, valued at $1,827.00, the property of another soldier; and the second charge was for making a false official statement on 14 April 1988. The available records do not contain the applicant’s request for an administrative separation, in lieu of trail by court-martial; however, the record does contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), authenticated by the applicant, which documents the following facts: Character of Service-Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOHC); Authority for Separation-Chapter 10, AR 635-200; Narrative Reason for Separation-For the Good of the Service/In Lieu of Court-Martial.

         b. The DD Form 214 also documents that the applicant was separated on 1 December 1988, with a UOHC discharge. At the time of his discharge the applicant had completed 2 years, 11 months, and 16 days of his current enlistment and a total of 12 years, 5 months, and 8 days of active military service.

         c. The applicant’s record shows that he completed over 12 years of service; attained the rank of staff sergeant/E-6; completed two overseas tours in Germany and a tour in Korea; and that he earned the Army Commendation Medal, three Good Conduct Medals, the Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon. In addition, although not recorded on the
DD Form 214, there is evidence that the applicant also received two Army Achievement Medals. There is no information pertaining to the applicant’s disciplinary history prior to the incidents which led to his discharge contained in the available records. However, it is clear that court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant and that he voluntarily requested an administrative separation in order to avoid prosecution and the punitive discharge which may have resulted.

2.
Legal/Regulatory Basis or Separation Action : Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The requests may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge UOHC is normally considered appropriate.


SECTION B-APPLICANT’S SUBMISSIONS


1. Issue(s) of propriety and/or equity submitted by applicant or counsel.
As stated on applicant’s DD Form 293.

2. Exhibit(s) submitted:

         A-1: DD Form 293, dated 990307, with one (1) enclosure(s).
         A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE
         B-l: Other Documents: NONE


PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED)



SECTION C - Medical and/or Legal Advisory Opinion



Referred to ( ) Medical Advisor ( ) Legal Advisor



a. Medical prehearing comments (if applicable):


b. Legal prehearing comments (if applicable):











PART V - SUMMARY OF HEARING

SECTION A-Attendees and exhibits


1. Review/hearing information:


         a. Type requested:
         ( X ) Records review ( ) Hearing

         b. Type Held:
         ( X )Records review ( ) Hearing
         ( ) Tender Offer

         c. Review/hearing location and date:
Washington D.C. on 21 April 1999.

         d. Appearance by:
         Applicant ( ) Yes ( X ) No
         Counsel ( ) Yes ( X ) No

         e. Applicant testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         f. Counsel presentation: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
         g. Witness(es) testified: ( ) Yes ( X ) No
        
2. Exhibit(s) submitted at hearing:


PART VI - ISSUES AND FINDINGS

1. a. Applicant's issue(s) of propriety and/or equity:

         ( X )   Same as those listed on DD Form 293 and Part IV, Section A of this case report and directive.
         ( )     Revised issue(s) furnished in writing by applicant as follows:
         ( )     Additional issue(s) identified during review/hearing as follows:

         b. Request: ( X ) Recharacterization ( ) Change of Reason



2. Finding(s), conclusion(s), and reason(s) for the Board's decision(s) on issues of propriety and/or equity:


         a. Propriety:    The applicant has not submitted an issue of propriety and the ADRB has not otherwise relied upon an issue of propriety to change the discharge.

         b. Equity:       The parenthetical number(s) below correspond(s) to the issue number(s) on the DD Form 293, or in Part VI, Paragraph 1, above.

(1) The issue is rejected. The Board noted the applicant’s contention that, in effect, his discharge was inequitable based on his overall record of service. However, the available records contain a properly constituted DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) which was authenticated by the applicant. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. The evidence of record shows the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. In connection with such a discharge, the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. Procedurally, the applicant was required to consult with defense counsel, and to voluntarily, and in writing, request separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated offenses under the UCMJ. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Board was satisfied that all requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. Finally, the Board considered the applicant’s entire record of service for the period under review. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.


3. Response(s) to item(s) not addressed as decisional issue(s): NONE


PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION A - Conclusions/Decisions/Vote

1.       Board conclusion(s):

         The discharge was:

         ( X )    Proper.
         ( )      Improper as to characterization. Change characterization to
                                     .
         ( )      Improper as to reason. Change reason to
                        under                       .

         ( X )    Equitable.
         ( )      Inequitable as to characterization. Change characterization to
                               .
         ( )      Inequitable as to reason. Change reason to
                      
                  under
                                 .
         ( )      Both proper and equitable, but characterization/reason for separation cited was an administrative/clerical error and should be changed to
                     under                          .

2. Voting record: Change No Change
         Reason 0 5
Characterization 0 5

         The names and votes of the members of the Board are recorded in Part IX of this document and can be obtained by writing to the address below. The request must contain the CASE NO. located in the upper right corner of this document.

Department of the Army Review Boards Agency
ATTN: Promulgation Team
1941 Jefferson Davis Highway, 2nd Floor
Arlington, VA 22202-4508



3. Minority views: NONE


PART VII - BOARD ACTION
SECTION B - Verification and Authentication

Case report reviewed and verified       

                                 
MR. ADRAINCE
Case Reviewing Official 

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

NONE

SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


THOMAS J. ALLEN
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




SUZANNE WALKER
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder

EXHIBITS:
A - Application for review of discharge          C - Other
B - Material submitted by applicant

INDEX RECORD:

AR Number: 1999024585 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 990421 A9201
Character of Service: UD A0100
Date of Discharge: 881201
Authority: AR 635-200 C10
Reason: A7000
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 5-0 A















PART IX - VOTING RECORD

Name  Reason Characterization
CHANGE NC HON UHC NC UNCHAR
1.      Mbr      X          X    

2.
     Mbr      X          X    

3.
     Mbr      X          X    

4.
     Mbr      X          X    

5.
     Mbr      X          X    

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99033160

    Original file (99033160.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant AR Number: 1999033160 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 991117 A0100 Character of Service: GD A9500 Date of...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998014420

    Original file (1998014420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 February 1988, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter l0, AR 635-200 for the good of the Service-in lieu of court-martial. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025906

    Original file (1999025906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board,...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025278

    Original file (1999025278.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999023747

    Original file (AR1999023747.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A-2: Counsel Issues: NONE B-l: Other Documents: NONE PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW (CONTINUED) It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Mr. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025668

    Original file (1999025668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. ADRIANCE Case Reviewing Official PART...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999019290

    Original file (1999019290.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief.3. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025819

    Original file (1999025819.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 June 1988, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter l0, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025793

    Original file (1999025793.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. It also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is normally under other than honorable conditions and that the applicant was aware of that prior to requesting discharge. PART VII -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025004

    Original file (1999025004.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Chapter l0 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant AR Number: 1999025004 INDEX NUMBERS: A9236 Date of Review: 990428 A9218 Character of Service: UD A9307 Date of...