Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070001091
Original file (AR20070001091.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Application Receipt Date: 070124	

Prior Review    Prior Review Date: None

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

Issues: See DD Form 293 with attachments

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: 050128
Discharge Received:     Date: 050216   
Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial
RE:     SPD: KFS
Unit/Location: Company B, 1st Battalion, 329th Infantry, Fort Benning, GA  31905 

Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 202 days from (040705-050121).  He surrendered to the military authorities at Fort Benning, GA and was transferred to Fort Knox, KY  40121

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

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

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB:  850908  
Current ENL Date: 040525    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  16 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 0 Yrs, 2 Mos, 5 Days ?????
Total Service:  0 Yrs, 2 Mos, 5 Days ?????
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E1
Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: None   GT: NIF   EDU: GED   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: None
V.  Post-Discharge Activity
Home of Record: 
Current Address: 
Post Service Accomplishments: See DD Form 293 with attachments

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

      a.  Facts and Circumstances:
      The evidence of record shows that on 27 January 2005, the applicant was charged with AWOL, from (5 July 2004 to 22 January 2005).  On 27 January 2005, 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 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 and intermediate commanders recommended approval of an under other than honorable conditions discharge.  On 4 February 2005, 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, documents, and the issue he 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted that the applicant met entrance qualification standards to include age.  The analyst further found no evidence that the applicant was any less mature than other soldiers of the same age who successfully completed military service.  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: 13 June 2007              
Location: Atlanta, GA

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: N/A

Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A




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 0    No change 5   - 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, voted to deny relief.  
























Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Ron Williams, Examiner									        
X.  Board Action Directed
No Change 
Issue a new DD Form 214  
Change Characterization to:    
Change Reason to: None
Other: None
RE Code:  
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes  Grade: None

XI.  Certification Signature and Date
Approval Authority: 

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

Official: 


MARY E. SHAW				DATE: 26 June 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20070001091

Applicant Name:  Mr.      
______________________________________________________________________


Page 6 of 6 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070001091aC071031

    Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: 050128 Discharge Received: Date: 050216 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: Company B, 1st Battalion, 329th Infantry, Fort Benning, GA 31905 Time Lost: AWOL, for a total of 202 days from (040705-050121). 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060012095

    Original file (AR20060012095.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. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070003084aC071031

    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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014499

    Original file (AR20060014499.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 790805 Current ENL Date: 021029 Current ENL Term: 3 Years The applicant was retained in the service 148 days for the convenience of the Government per AR 635-200. The applicant's chain of command recommended approval of the request for discharge under the provisions Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial, with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 6 September 2005, the separation authority approved the discharge with an under...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070001876

    Original file (AR20070001876.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Previous Discharges: Total service on DD Form 214, is incorrect, should read 02 yrs, 00 mos, 08 days. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070001876aC071031

    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...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070003084

    Original file (AR20070003084.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 05 Mos, 01 Days ????? The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 11 October 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009629

    Original file (AR20070009629.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ???? 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060006705

    Original file (AR20060006705.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. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S....

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015478

    Original file (AR20060015478.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 29 Days Item 12c on DD Form 214, net active service this period is incorrect, should read 01 Yrs, 01 Mos, 29 Days. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 28 November 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S....