Application Receipt Date: 070330
Prior Review Prior Review Date: 050912/Records
I. Applicant Request
Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change
Issues: See applicant's DD Form 293 and attached document.
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: 990128
Chapter: 3 AR: 635-200
Reason: Court-Martial, Other
RE: SPD: JJD
Unit/Location: HHC 3rd Battalion, 325th Infantry (ABCT), APO AE 09630
Time Lost: Confinement Military Authority-49 days from (951214-960131), as
a result of his special court-martial sentence.
Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None
Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 951214-Special Court-
Martial/With intent to deceive, made a false statement, (950817), larceny
of property x 2, stole a bike of a value of about $895.00, the property of
AAFES, (941229), and stole a bike of a value of about $1,510.00, the
property of AAFES, (950717). The applicant was sentenced to be reduced to
Private/E1, forfeiture of $569.00 pay for six months, confinement for two
months, and a bad conduct discharge.
Counseling Records Available: Yes No
IV. Soldier’s Overall Record
DOB: 710122
Current ENL Date: 921029 Current ENL Term: 4 Years 17 Weeks
Current ENL Service: 06 Yrs, 01 Mos, 11 Days The applicant was retained in
the service 652 days for the convenience of the Government per AR 635-200.
Total Service: 06 Yrs, 01 Mos, 11 Days
Previous Discharges: None
Highest Grade: E4
Performance Ratings Available: Yes No
MOS: 11B1P Infantryman GT: 103 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: Italy Combat:
None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, 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:
Evidence of record shows that on 14 December 1995, the applicant was
found guilty by a Special Court-Martial of, with intent to deceive, made a
false statement, 17 August 1995; larceny of property x 2, stole a bike of a
value of about $895.00, the property of AAFES, 29 December 1994, and stole
a bike of a value of about $1,510.00, the property of AAFES, 17 July 1995.
The applicant was sentenced to be reduced to Private/E1, forfeiture of
$569.00 pay for six months, confinement for two months, and a bad conduct
discharge. On 9 April 1996, 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 10 February 1997, the United States Army
Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the
sentence. On 16 December 1998, the sentence having been affirmed pursuant
to Article 71© having been complied with, the sentence was ordered to be
executed.
The applicant was placed on excess leave for 959 days, from 14 June
1996-28 January 1999.
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 careful review of all the applicant’s military records during
the period of enlistment under review and the document he submitted, 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 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 and
the issue he submitted, the analyst found no cause for clemency and
therefore recommends to the Board that clemency is not warranted.
Therefore, the characterization of service and the reason for discharge
were both proper and equitable.
VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing
Type of Hearing: Date: 15 October 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No
Counsel:
Witnesses/Observers:
Exhibits Submitted:
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, hearing his testimony, and considering
the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board found no cause for
clemency and therefore voted to deny relief.
Case report reviewed and verified by: Mr. Kenneth McFarley, Examiner
X. Board Action Directed
No Change
Issue a new DD Form 214
Change Characterization to:
Change Reason to: None
Other: NA
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:
CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE: 26 October 2007
Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army
Chief, Secretary Recorder
AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070004571
Total Service: 06 Yrs, 01 Mos, 11 Days ????? 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 careful review of all...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110024351
Applicant Name: ????? The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-martial and that the convening authority approved the sentence. After a thorough review of the applicants record and the application he submitted, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency.
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090001693
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. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-martial and that the sentence was approved...
ARMY | DRB | CY2012 | AR20120004550
Applicant Name: ????? EF married the applicants sister-in-law and agreed that EF and his wife would live with the applicant and wife and that EF would pay $400 a month rent starting in September. After a thorough review of the applicants records and the issue and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110008211
Applicant Name: ????? 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. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change...
ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008896
Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 14Days ????? The Army Discharge Review Board is empowered to change the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. 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:...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008656
Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 29 April 2008, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 14-12c, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense for AWOL, failure to obey a lawful order, making a false official statement, and larceny of over $900 resulting in a Field Grade Article 15 ( 080215), with a general, under honorable conditions...
ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000305
Applicant Name: ????? On 7 August 2002, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...
ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080008838
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 | CY2000 | 2000047045
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. PART VII - BOARD ACTIONSECTION B - Verification and Authentication Case report reviewed and verified Ms. McKim-Spilker Case Reviewing Official PART VIII - DIRECTIVE/CERTIFICATIONSECTION A - DIRECTIVE NONE SECTION B - CERTIFICATION Approval Authority:WILSON A. SHATZER Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board AR Number:...