Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013681
Original file (AR20080013681.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 2008/09/02	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: The Applicant states that in addition to an upgrade of his discharge to a General Discharge, he would also like to have his rank changed in his DD Form 214.  He was reduced to E-4 not to E-1.

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

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: Not In File
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 050311   Chapter: 3, Section IV    AR: 635-200
Reason: Court Martial, Other	   RE:     SPD: JJD   Unit/Location: C Co, 577th EN Bn, Fort Leonard Wood, MO 

Time Lost: 119 days, military confinement (040218-040616)

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040218, SPCM, AWOL x 5 (031028-031029, 031030-031031, 031104-031105, 031105-031106, and 031016), wrongful use of cocaine (030710-030724), wrongful use of 
d-methamphetamines x 2 (031001-031016 and 031201-031218), and wrongful use of marijuana x 2 (031001-031016, 031201-031218), reduction to E-4, forfeiture of $700 x 5, confinement for 155 days, Bad Conduct Discharge.

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  41
Current ENL Date: 030225    Current ENL Term: ?? Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	01 Yrs, 08Mos, 17Days ?????
Total Service:  		15 Yrs, 00Mos, 04Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 831011-870902/HD
                                       RA 870903-910506/HD
                                       RA 910507-930510/HD
                                       ARNG 930511-940510/NIF
                                       USAR 000920-030224/NA  
Highest Grade: E-7		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 12B40/Combat Engineer   GT: 122   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AGCM-3, NDSM-2, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR-2, AFRM, EIB

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Indianapolis, IN
Post Service Accomplishments: None listed

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 18 February 2004, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial of wrongful use of cocaine (030710-030724), AWOL x 5 (031016, 031028-031029, 031030-031031, 031104-031105, 031105-031106), wrongful use of d-amphetamines x 2 (031001-031016, 031201-031218), and wrongful use of marijuana x 2 (031001-031016, 031201-031218).  He was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, confinement for 155 days, forfeiture of $700 for five months, and reduction to E-4.  The sentence was approved on 26 March 2004, except for the part of the sentence extending to the BCD.  The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by the Court of Military Review.  On 3 December 2004, SPCM Orders Number 4, DA, HQ,  USA Fort Leonard Wood, MO, indicate that The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence.  On 26 May 2004, the sentence having been affirmed pursuant to Article 71c having been complied with, the sentence was ordered to be executed.

       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, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would warrant clemency.  There was a full consideration of all faithful and honorable service as well as the incidents of misconduct.  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.  Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process.  The analyst is empowered to recommend a change to 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.  Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant's issue; however, the Army Discharge Review Board is not empowered to restore former service member's grade, rate or rank.  The Board may only change the characterization or reason for discharge.  If an applicant believes there is an error or injustice in his discharge, he then may make an application to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, utilizing a DD Form 149, which is enclosed.  In view of the foregoing and after a thorough review of the applicant’s record and the issue submitted with his application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency.  

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 5 June 2009         Location: Washington, D.C.

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: NA
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20080013681
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110000025

    Original file (AR20110000025.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-martial and that the convening authority approved the sentence. 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 Legend: AWOL Absent Without Leave GCM General Court Martial NA Not applicable SCM Summary Court Martial BCD Bad Conduct Discharge...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013541

    Original file (AR20080013541.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived consideration of his case by an administrative separation board,and did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general, under honorable conditions. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090007012

    Original file (AR20090007012.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Board Action Directed President, Army Discharge Review Board Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority Other: None RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: Restoration of grade to E-4/SPC.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070016741

    Original file (AR20070016741.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 10 March 2004, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of general under honorable conditions. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090004977

    Original file (AR20090004977.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 18 February 2004, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, paragraph 12c (1), AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct commission of a serious offense for being absent without leave x5 (031009-031020), (031022-031029), (031101-031104), (031107-031203) and (031203-040122); disobeying a commissioned officer (031009); disobeying a noncommissioned officer x3 (030609)...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000705

    Original file (AR20090000705.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? On 23 May 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge 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: No Change Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500062

    Original file (MD0500062.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.010731: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: … violate a lawful order … Violation of UCMJ, Article 134 (3 specs):Specification 1: … assault … your roommate, by choking and pushing him down … Specification 2: … was … disorderly in conduct … Specification 3: …...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501111

    Original file (ND0501111.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service and medical records, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 Transcripts Full-time student confirmation, dtd September 13, 2004 Evaluation Report and Counseling Record, dtd July 1, 2002 Evaluation Report and Counseling Record, dtd July 15, 2003 Evaluation Report and Counseling Record, dtd December 16, 2003 Appointment of veterans service organization as claimant’s representative, dtd...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060013467

    Original file (AR20060013467.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with an Honorable discharge. On 30 Mar 05, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a characterization of service of Honorable. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: CHRISTINE U. MARTINSON DATE:...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080016764

    Original file (AR20080016764.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current ENL Service: 3 Yrs, 11Mos, 11Days ????? On 12 August 2004, the sentence was approved. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommend to the Board to deny clemency.