Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003092937
Original file (2003092937.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): 991008

3. Authority for separation:

         a. Regulation: Chapter 10, AR 635-200

          b. Reason: 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: 4 Years AFSM
b. Entry date: 970121 NATO Medal
c. Age: 22 Years DOB: 740218 NDSM
d. Educational level: HS Grad ASR
e. Aptitude area score:
          GT: 89 3. Highest grade achieved:
f. Length of Service: E4
2 Years 7 Months 13 Days

4. Performance evaluations:
NONE

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

5. Periods of unauthorized absence:

Status Inclusive dates
         AWOL 990412-990516

         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: The applicant’s separation packet refers to the applicant accepting nonjudicial punishment under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ on one occasion (NIF).
SECTION B - Prior Service Data

Other discharge(s):

          Service   From      To        Type Discharge
         USAR     941219   950124   NA
         ADT      950125   950504   Uncharacterized
         USAR     950505   970120   NA



PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW

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

         a. The evidence of record shows that on 19 May 1999, the applicant was charged with AWOL from 12 April-17 May 1999. On 20 May 1999, 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. 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 8 October 1999, the applicant was discharged. At the time of discharge, the applicant had completed 2 years, 7 months, and 13 days of active military service and accrued 34 days of lost time in the period under review.

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 under other than honorable conditions 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 030620, with 31 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, DC on 28 January 2004 .

         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 the infractions of discipline, the extent thereof, and the seriousness of the offenses. The Board noted the applicant’s contentions; however, did not find said contentions sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of the discharge under review. Further, the Board found no evidence of arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the applicant’s change of command. 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, 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 1 4

         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. RIVERA
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:




MARY E. SHAW
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: 2003092937 INDEX NUMBERS: A9235
Date of Review: 040128 A9411
Character of Service: UD A0113
Date of Discharge: 991008
Authority: AR 635-200 C10
Reason: A7100
Results of Board Action/
Vote/Affirmation: NC 4-1 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 | CY2003 | 2003087974

    Original file (2003087974.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 December 2000, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of UOHC. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002066965

    Original file (2002066965.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 29 September 1999, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. 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. Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001052040

    Original file (2001052040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and submitted a statement in his own behalf. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:GERARD W. SCHWARTZ Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board EXHIBITS: A - Application for...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2003 | 2003091834

    Original file (2003091834.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200, in lieu of trial by court-martial, with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions discharge. This document identifies the reason and characterization of the discharge and the Board presumed Government regularity in the discharge process. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RON WILLIAMS Case...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2001 | 2001051494

    Original file (2001051494.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, voluntarily waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. His DD Form 214 indicates that he was discharged under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200 by reason of misconduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. However, the Board noted that the applicant’s discharge packet for the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2004 | AR2004102581

    Original file (AR2004102581.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 July 2002, the Deputy Assistant Secretary (Army Review Boards) accepted the applicant’s resignation and directed that he be separated with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 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. Minority views: NONE PART VII - BOARD ACTION SECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RIVERA Case Reviewing...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY1999 | 99032306

    Original file (99032306.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Also there is a Bar to Reenlistment in file dated (870701) SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONE Other discharge(s): ServiceFromToType Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEWSECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified MR. RON WILLIAMS Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:THOMAS J....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000037983

    Original file (2000037983.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, requested a hearing by a board of officers and did not submit a statement on his own behalf. The board recommended separation for misconduct-patterns of misconduct with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. On 14 May 1992, the applicant was discharged.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2000 | 2000040371

    Original file (2000040371.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board carefully reviewed the applicant’s record during the period of service under review. EXHIBITS: A - Application for review of discharge C - Other B - Material submitted by applicant AR Number: 2000040371 INDEX NUMBERS: A9217 Date of Review: 000628 A9235 Character of Service: HD A9455 Date of Discharge: 991010 A0100 Authority: AR 600-8-24 C3 Reason: A8000 Results of Board Action/ Vote/Affirmation: NC 5-0 A Name Reason Characterization CHANGENCHONUHCNCUNCHAR 1.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2002 | 2002079344

    Original file (2002079344.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    Remarks: NONE SECTION B - Prior Service Data NONE Other discharge(s): Service From To Type Discharge PART IV - PREHEARING REVIEW SECTION A-ANALYST’S ASSESSMENT l. Facts and Circumstances: a. Evidence of record shows that on 10 December 2001, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter l4, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct, with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. Minority views: NONE PART...