PART II - APPLICATION DATA

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

1.  Character of Discharge:  Bad Conduct

2.  Date of discharge (or REFRAD):  010618

3.  Authority for separation:

      a.  Regulation:  Chapter 3, AR 635-200

      b.  Reason:  Court-Martial, Other

4.  Prior review(s):  NONE



                         PART III - SERVICE HISTORY

                 SECTION A - Period of Service Under Review

1.    Service data:                              2.  Awards and
    decorations:
                                           NONE
    a.  Period entered for:  6 Years
    b.  Entry date:  970523
    c.  Age:  19 Years   DOB:  771125


    d.  Educational level:  HS Grad


    e.  Aptitude area score:
          GT:  120                               3.  Highest grade
achieved:
    f.  Length of Service:                         E1
          4 Year(s)  0 Month(s)  26 Day(s)


                                               4.  Performance evaluations:

                                                   NONE

                         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:  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 29 January 1998, the applicant
was found guilty by a Special Court-Martial of wrongfully appropriating the
property of a PVT.  He was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct
Discharge.  On 10 August 1998, the sentence was approved.  The record of
trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by
the Court of Military Review.  On 14 October 1998, the applicant was placed
on excess leave pending the affirmation and execution of the Bad Conduct
Discharge.  On 16 February 2001, the portion of the sentence pertaining to
the Bad Conduct Discharge was affirmed by the Court of Military Review
pursuant to Article 71c, and was ordered executed.

      b.  On 18 June 2001, the applicant was discharged.  At the time of
discharge, the applicant had completed 4 years and 26 days of active
military service 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 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating
members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a
soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved
sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate
review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed.




                      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 030818, with three (3) 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 28 April
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.
 The Board noted the applicant’s contentions; however, his contentions
relate to evidentiary and procedural matters which were finally and
conclusively adjudicated in the court-martial appellate process, and
furnish no basis for recharacterization of his discharge.  The evidence of
record clearly shows that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-
martial and that the sentence was approved by the convening authority.
Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through
the judicial process.  The ADRB is empowered to change the discharge 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.  After a thorough review of the applicant’s record and any issues
submitted, the Board found no cause for clemency and therefore 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

                          
Ms. McKim-Spilker
Case Reviewing Official

                     PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATION
                            SECTION A - DIRECTIVE

                                    NONE

                          SECTION B - CERTIFICATION

Approval Authority:


ROBERT L. HOUSE
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:  2003095548                    INDEX NUMBERS:  A9105
Date of Review:  040428                                   A0113
Character of Service:  BD
Date of Discharge:  010618
Authority:  AR 635-200 C3
Reason:  A6800
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.      PO           X                 X