Application Receipt Date: 060616	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

I.  Applicant Request
Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?  
Yes    No        Tender Offer:   ?????

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Original Character of Discharge
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge:    Date: 030501
Discharge Received:     Date: 040505   
Chapter: 3    AR: 635-200
Reason: Court-Martial, Other
RE:     SPD: JJD
Unit/Location: A Battery, Personnel and Support Battalion, US Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Fort Sill OK 

Time Lost:  Confined by military authorities for a total of 115 days from 030501-030823, as a result of his Special Court-Martial 030501.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030501/Special Court-Martial/Between on or about 020301 and on or about 020731 for stealing a checkbook of some value the property of another Soldier, between on or about 020827 and on or about 020923 for stealing deposit funds of value of $2,250 the property of another Soldier and between on or about 020827 and on or about 020923 with the intend to defraud, falsely made the signature of another Soldier to certain checks in the amount of $200.00, $250.00, $250.00, $300.00, $350.00, $400.00, and $500.00 for a total of $2,250.00 which such checks would if genuine, apparently operate to the legal harm of another Soldier.  She was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, forfeiture of $767.00 pay per month for six months, confinement for six months, and reduction to E1.



Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  810717  
Current ENL Date: 020227    Current ENL Term: 03 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 14Days ?????
Total Service:  03 Yrs, 03Mos, 14Days ?????
Previous Discharges: ARNG-000927-010326/NA
                                      ADT-010327-010816/UNC
                                      ARNG-010817-020226/HD
Highest Grade: E3
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 42A10 (Personnel Service Specialist)   GT: 78   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM (2d Award), ASR
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      Evidence of record shows that on 1 May 2003, the applicant was found guilty pursuant to her pleas by a special court-martial of between on or about 1 March 2002 and on or about 31 July 2002 stealing a checkbook of some value the property of another Soldier; between on or about 27 August 2002 and on or about 23 September 2002 stealing deposit funds of value of $2,250 the property of another Soldier; and between on or about 27 August 2002 and on or about 23 September 2002, with the intent to defraud by forging checks of another Solder in the amounts of $200.00, $250.00, $250.00, $300.00, $350.00, $400.00, and $500.00 for a total of $2,250.00.  She was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, forfeiture of $767.00 pay per month for six months, confinement for six months, and reduction to E1.  On 7 August 2003, only so much of the sentence as provided for reduction to the grade of private E1, forfeiture of $767.00 pay per month for six months, confinement for 4 months and 15 days, and discharge from the service with a bad-conduct discharge was approved.  Except for the part of the sentence extending to a bad-conduct discharge, the sentence was ordered to be executed.  The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals.  On 30 September 2003, the court affirmed the findings of gulity and the sentence.  On 5 January 2004, the sentence having been affirmed pursuant to Article 71c having been complied with, the bad-conduct discharge was ordered to be executed and that part of the sentence extending to confinement has been served.

      b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
      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.

      c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
      After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would warrant clemency.  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 Army Discharge Review Board 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, the analyst found no cause to recommend clemency and therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 23 May 2007              
Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA




VIII.  Board Decision
The discharge was:			Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The characterization of service was:   Proper	 	Improper	
				                 	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

The narrative reasons were: 	       	Equitable	 	Inequitable	

DRB voting record:  		      	Change     No change    (Character)
		 			       	Change     No change    (Reason)
					      (Board member names available upon request)

IX.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted not to change it.





















Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: NA
Other: NA
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: NA

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

MARK E. COLLINS
Colonel, U.S. Army
President, Army Discharge Review Board

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 31 May 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060008896

Applicant Name:  Ms.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 5 of 5 pages