Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090000705
Original file (AR20090000705.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  ?????

Application Receipt Date: 2008/12/10	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See 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: 060511
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 060605   Chapter: 10    AR: 635-200
Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial	   RE:     SPD: KFS   Unit/Location: B CO, 3rd FSB, Ft Stewart, GA 

Time Lost: AWOL (031016-031023) and (031031-040206), apprehended by civilian authorities, total of 98 days.

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 040324, AWOL (031016-031023) and (031031-040206); no punishment imposed. 

050228, wrongfully use cocaine (041027), reduction to E2, forfeiture of $743 pay and extra duty for 45 days (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  19
Current ENL Date: 060508    Current ENL Term: 2 months Years  Extended convenience of the Government
Current ENL Service: 	3 Yrs, 00Mos, 21Days ?????
Total Service:  		3 Yrs, 00Mos, 21Days Retained in Service 61 days for Convenience of Govt
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 63H/ Tracked Vehicle Mech   GT: 107   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: SWA   Combat: Iraq (050108-060108)
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, NDSM, ICM, GWOTSM, CAB, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Alpharetta, GA
Post Service Accomplishments: None submitted by the Applicant.

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
       The evidence of record shows that on 28 April 2006, the applicant was charged with wrongful use of cocaine (060303-060306).  On 3 May 2006, 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 23 May 2006, the separation authority approved the discharge with a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions.  The applicant was to be reduced to the lowest enlisted rank.
       There is a CID Report in the file dated 7 April 2006 for wrongful use of cocaine.  

       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 submitted with the application, 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.  The analyst noted the applicant's issue and determined that eligibility for veteran's benefits to include educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill does not fall within the purview of the Army Discharge Review Board.  Accordingly, the applicant should contact a local office of the Department of Veterans Affairs for further assistance.  Therefore, the analyst determined that the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief. 

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 25 September 2009         Location: Washington, DC

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: None 

Exhibits Submitted: None


















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 determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and 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: NA
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090000705
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 1 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080013681

    Original file (AR20080013681.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 | CY2006 | AR20060016442

    Original file (AR20060016442.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 8 July 2005, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 14, AR 635-200, by reason of misconduct-pattern of misconduct for using cocaine (040731-040803), AWOL x 2 (040731-040803 and 040206-040211), and operating a motor vehicle while impaired (020701), with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. On 22 July 2005 the applicant consulted with legal counsel. ...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080015312

    Original file (AR20080015312.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070012786

    Original file (AR20070012786.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See enclosed DD Form 293 submitted by the applicant. 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 | 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...

  • 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060014128

    Original file (AR20060014128.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 | CY2008 | AR20080018986

    Original file (AR20080018986.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? However, in review of the applicant’s entire service record, the analyst found that these accomplishments did not overcome the reason for discharge and characterization of service granted. 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...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090012566

    Original file (AR20090012566.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: The applicant submitted the following documents: Self-Authored Statement; Letter from the Applicant's Parents, dated (090611); Four (4) Supporting Statements; DD Form 214, dated (080429); and Four (4) Pages of Photos. Accordingly, the Board voted to change the characterization of service to fully honorable.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070009993

    Original file (AR20070009993.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The memorandum further indicates that the applicant's request was disapproved, and his defense counsel requested reconsideration of the applicant's request for separation in lieu of courts-martial. 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...