Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003087614
Original file (2003087614.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
PART II - APPLICATION DATA

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

1. Character of Discharge: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions

2. Date of discharge (or REFRAD): 911010

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 10, AR 635-200

         b. Reason: For the Good of Service-In Lieu of Trial by 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:
                           AAM
a. Period entered for: 6 Years GCDMDL (3d Awd)
b. Entry date: 901108 NDSM
c. Age: 29 Years DOB: 610302 NCOPDR
d. Educational level: HS Grad ASR
e. Aptitude area score: OSR
         GT: 107 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E6
Year(s) 5 Month(s) 14 Day(s)

4. Performance evaluations:
See OMPF


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

5. Periods of unauthorized absence:

Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL 910211-910219; 910301-910819;

        
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: NONE


SECTION B - Prior Service Data
NONE

Other discharge(s):

         Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         RA       800528 840425    HD
         RA                840426 880203             HD
         RA                880204 901107             HD





PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a.
The evidence of record shows that on 10 September 1991, the applicant was charged with AWOL (000301-000820). On 10 September 1991, 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. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense. Further, the applicant indicated that he understood that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The unit commander recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 19 September 1991, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.

         b. On 10 October 1991, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 5 months and 14 days of active military service and accrued 176 days of lost time in the period under review and had a total of 10 years, 10 months and 12 days of active military service.

2.
Legal/Regulatory Basis for 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 030315.
         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, DC on 24 September 2003.

         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 carefully examined the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review. There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as infraction of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offense.
The Board noted the applicant’s contentions; however, the official record does not support the applicant’s contentions and the Board determined that his contentions were not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. The evidence of record shows the applicant was charged with the commission of an offense punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) with a punitive discharge. The Board noted that, after consulting with defense counsel, the applicant voluntarily, and in writing, requested separation from the Army in lieu of trial by court-martial. In doing so, the applicant admitted guilt to the stipulated or lesser-included offenses under the UCMJ. 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. 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 2 3

         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       

                                 
Ms. McKim-Spilker
Case Reviewing Official 

PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

NONE

SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


SPURGEON A. MOORE
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge
Review Board

Official:




JOHN F. LONG
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: 2003087614 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217
Date of Review: 030924 A9307
Character of Service: UD A9231
Date of Discharge: 911010 A0113
Authority: AR 635-200 C10
Reason: A7100
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 3-2 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.      PO      X          X    






Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 1999025029

    Original file (1999025029.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 | CY2000 | 2000043497

    Original file (2000043497.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. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MS. WADE Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99031553

    Original file (99031553.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Board issue: (2) The narrative reason for discharge is inequitable.b. While the Board does not condone the applicant’s misconduct, it determined that the characterization of service was inequitable because the applicant’s overall quality of service did not warrant the granting of an under other than honorable conditions discharge. ( X ) Change reason and authority for discharge to Misconduct, AR 635-200 .

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | AR1999016028

    Original file (AR1999016028.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board noted the contentions of the applicant and his counsel, that due to the circumstances of the case the UOHC discharge was too harsh; and that based on the applicant’s overall record of service the UOHC discharge was inequitable. The Board, being convinced that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable, voted to deny relief. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1998 | 1998012849

    Original file (1998012849.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. 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 SECTION B -...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001051984

    Original file (2001051984.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 6 May 1991, the applicant was discharged. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003083885

    Original file (2003083885.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior review(s): NONE PART III - SERVICE HISTORY SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review 1. 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

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002077385

    Original file (2002077385.TXT) 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | AR2003097379

    Original file (AR2003097379.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge RA 800716 840122 Honorable PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003085895

    Original file (2003085895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 August 1991, 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. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant AR Number: INDEX NUMBERS: A Date of Review: A Character of Service: A Date of Discharge: A Authority: (Regulation & Chapter) A Reason: A A Results of Board Action/ A Vote/Affirmation: NC 5-0 A A Name...