Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014128
Original file (AR20060014128.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 06/10/03	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: The applicant submitted no issues of equity or propriety to be considered by the Board. 

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: NIF
Discharge Received:     Date: 04/10/28   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: Joint Forces Intelligence Command, Norfolk VA 23511 

Time Lost: None

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

Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  75/06/25  
Current ENL Date: 990730    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 10 Yrs, 00Mos, 07Days Applicant extended in 1997 and 2003
Total Service:  10 Yrs, 00Mos, 02Days ?????
Previous Discharges: RA 941007-990729 HD 
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 42L10(Admin Specialist)   GT: 99   EDU: High School Grad   Overseas: Japan 95/03/05-97/03/03, Hawaii 97/04/16-03/08/12   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: JSCM, ARCOM, JSAM, GCM(3), NDSM(2),GWOTSM, ASR, OSR,
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:
      The evidence of record shows that on 30 September 2004, the applicant was charged with two specifications of wrongful use of marijuana (04/06/12-04/07/12, (04/02/21-04/03/22) and one specification of wrongful use of cocaine (04/07/09-04/07/12.  On 7 October 2004, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, 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 she understood that she 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 submitted a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 28 October 2004, 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.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 10 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 request 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.  


      

      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 merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.  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 applicant consulted with defense counsel, and voluntarily 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 analyst noted that all the requirements of law and regulation were met and the rights of the applicant were fully protected throughout the separation process.  It is 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.  Therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends for the board to deny relief.   

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing 

Type of Hearing: 			Date: 30 November 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 2    No change 3   - Character
		 			      Change 0    No change 5   - 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 to deny relief.  

Case report reviewed and verified by: Chuck Busick, 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: ?????

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON			DATE: 3 December 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20060014128

Applicant Name:  Ms.        
______________________________________________________________________


Page 4 of 5 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012951

    Original file (AR20060012951.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would merit a partial upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. The analyst found that the length and quality of the applicant's service, to include his combat service, and the circumstances surrounding his discharge mitigated the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070005183aC071121

    Chapter 10 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 is 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. Board...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070005183

    Original file (AR20070005183.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Chapter 10 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 is 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. ...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060007090

    Original file (AR20060007090.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would warrant an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013379

    Original file (AR20060013379.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 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 is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013359

    Original file (AR20070013359.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It is 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.

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015821

    Original file (AR20060015821.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 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 is also noted that the characterization of service for this type of discharge is...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060016049

    Original file (AR20060016049.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 March 2003, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060010487

    Original file (AR20060010487.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application Receipt Date: 060728 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 00Mos, 17Days ????? It is 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060009751

    Original file (AR20060009751.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 00Mos, 26Days ????? It is 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. 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...