Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080003335
Original file (AR20080003335.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/02/27	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant.

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: NIF
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 061228   Chapter: 3      AR: 635-200
Reason: Court-Martial, Other	   RE:     SPD: JJD   Unit/Location: A Co, 1-505th IN Bn (ABN), Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: Confinement/Military Authorities for 120 days (050308-050708), as a result of his court-martial sentence.

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 050308, SPCM, for wrongfully possessing drug paraphernalia (041213), wrongfully importing approximately 30 vials of steroids, a schedule III controlled substance into the United States on board an aircraft used by the armed forces on a return flight from Iraq (040329), wrongfully using steroids between (040301-040430), wrongfully importing some amount of hashish marijuana into the United States on board an aircraft used by the armed forces on a return flight from Iraq (041101), and wrongfully using cocaine and marijuana between (041101-041207). BCD, confinement for 140 days and reduction to E-1.  

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  28
Current ENL Date: 030102    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	03 Yrs, 07Mos, 26Days ?????
Total Service:  		03 Yrs, 08Mos, 26Days Includes 497 days of excess leave (050819-061228). 
Previous Discharges: 	USAR-021202-030101/NA
Highest Grade: E-4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 74D1P Chemical Operations Spec   GT: NIF   EDU: 16 Years   Overseas: Southwest Asia   Combat: Iraq (Dates NIF)
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, GWOTSM

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Rockford, IL
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed 

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       Evidence of record shows that on 8 March 2005, the applicant was found guilty by a Special Court-Martial for wrongful possession of drug paraphernalia (041213), wrongfully imported approximately 30 vials of steroids, a schedule III controlled substance into the United States on board an aircraft used by the armed forces on a return flight from Iraq (040329), wrongfully used steroids between (040301-040430), wrongfully imported some amount of hashish marijuana into the United States on board an aircraft used by the armed forces on a return flight from Iraq (041101), and  wrongfully used cocaine and marijuana between (041101-041207).  The applicant was sentenced to confinement for 140 days, reduction to E-1 and a bad-conduct discharge.  On 17 June 2005, 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.  The United States Army Court of Military Review document affirming the approved findings of guilty and the sentence are not part of the available record and the analyst presumed Government regularity in the discharge process.  On 11 July 2006, the sentence having been affirmed pursuant to Article 71c having been complied with, the sentence was ordered to be executed.
       
       The analyst noted that the applicant's promotion to SGT/ E-5 was revoked on (0501125).  

       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 issues he 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 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 issues he submitted, the analyst found no cause for clemency and recommends to the Board no clemency.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, at the time of discharge the applicant was appropriately assigned a reentry eligibility (RE) code of “4.”  An RE code of “4” can not be waived and the applicant is no longer eligible for reenlistment.  In view of the foregoing, the analyst determined that 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: 10 December 2008         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: NA

Witnesses/Observers: NA 

Exhibits Submitted: NA

VIII.  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 found no cause for clemency and therefore voted to deny relief.









 
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: None
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080003335
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019615

    Original file (AR20080019615.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 indicates that the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and that the sentence was approved by...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008255

    Original file (AR20090008255.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 11Mos, 03Days ????? The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and that the sentence was approved by the convening authority. 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 found no cause for clemency and therefore voted to deny relief.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060008126

    Original file (AR20060008126.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 00 Mos, 09 Days ????? The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070013018

    Original file (AR20070013018.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The evidence of record indicates that the Applicant was adjudged guilty by a court-martial and that the...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080002242

    Original file (AR20080002242.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The Army Discharge Review Board is empowered to change the characterization of the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Accordingly, the analyst recommends to the Board that the applicant’s characterization of service be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions based on the overall length and quality of his service to include his combat service in Iraq.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090001693

    Original file (AR20090001693.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | AR20060012064

    Original file (AR20060012064.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This would change his "Total Service" from 2 yrs, 4 mos, and 18 days, to 2 yrs, 2 mos, and 18 days. The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a under other than honorable conditions 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000828

    Original file (AR20090000828.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record and the issues he submitted, the analyst found no cause for clemency and recommends to the Board no clemency.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012106

    Original file (AR20090012106.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 21 January 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14-12b, AR 635-200, by reason of a pattern of misconduct; in that he has continual problems with failure to repair, and for his actions, he received two Company Grade Article 15s, a Field Grade Article 15 and one vacation of suspended punishment, with a general, under honorable...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090002798

    Original file (AR20090002798.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. This single incident of misconduct clearly diminished the quality of the applicant's...