Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008419
Original file (AR20090008419.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 2009/04/25	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: NA     

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: See DD Form 293 and supporting documents submitted by the applicant.

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

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: N/A
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 001212   Chapter: 3      AR: 635-200
Reason: Court Martial, Other	   RE:     SPD: JJD   Unit/Location: HHC, Special Troops Bn, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: 46 days, confinement as  result of a court martial (960622-960805)

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

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 960318, Special Court Martial for assault consummated by battery.  He was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge and reduction to the grade of Private (E1).

960806, Special Court Martial for wrongfully communicating a threat.  He was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, confinement for 45 days and reduction to the grade of Private (E1).


Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  22
Current ENL Date: 930916    Current ENL Term: 3 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	07 Yrs, 01Mos, 10Days Includes 1638 days of excess leave (960619-001212).  The applicant was retained in the service 1504 days for the convenience of the government per AR 635-200.
Total Service:  		09 Yrs, 11Mos, 08Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	RA 901120-930915 HD Immediate Reenlistment
Highest Grade: E4		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 92G1P  Food Service Spec   GT: 105   EDU: HS Grad   Overseas: Korea   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: ARCOM, AAMx2, AGCM, NDSM, NCOPDR, ASR, OSR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  
Post Service Accomplishments: None provided by the applicant

VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
             The evidence of record shows that on 18 March 1996, the applicant was found guilty by a special court-martial of assault consumated by battery.  He was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, and reduction to E-1.  On 4 June 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 3 October 1997, The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and  the sentence, and  having been affirmed pursuant to Article 71c being  complied with, ordered the sentence  be executed. 
          Additionally, the evidence of record shows that on 6 August 1996, the applicant was found guilty by a second special court-martial of wrongfully communicating a threat.  He was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, confinement for 45 days and reduction to E-1.  On 2 January 1997, 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 19 March 2003, The United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence. The accused was credited with 46 days of confinement against the sentence to confinement.  It was noted  that the previous special court martial was affirmed by the U.S. Army Court of Criminal appeals and the bad conduct discharge was ordered executed in the Special Courts Martial Order Number 64, Headquarters, United States Army Armor Center and Fort Knox dated 3 October 1997. 

       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.  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 recommends to the Board to deny clemency. 


























 
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 16 February 2010         Location: Washington, D.C.

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: 


Witnesses/Observers: N/A 

Exhibits Submitted: N/A

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 0

								         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: ?????
ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090008419
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 2 of 3 pages

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090005640

    Original file (AR20090005640.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...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | AR20060015827

    Original file (AR20060015827.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, confinement for two months, and reduction to E1. After a thorough review of the applicant's record and the issue he submitted, the analyst now believes clemency is warranted and therefore recommends to the Board that it grant clemency in the form of an upgrade of the applicant's characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S....

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070004571

    Original file (AR20070004571.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | DRB | CY2007 | AR20070004571aC071121

    On 10 February 1997, the United States Army Court of Military Review affirmed the approved findings of guilty and the sentence. 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. ...

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090008286

    Original file (AR20090008286.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-martial and that the convening authority approved the sentence. The Army Discharge Review Board is empowered to change the characterization of the discharge only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Yes No Counsel: NA Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2009 | AR20090009300

    Original file (AR20090009300.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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 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 | CY2006 | AR20060008896

    Original file (AR20060008896.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | AR20070019021

    Original file (AR20070019021.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See DD Form 293 submitted by the Applicant II. 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. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record and the issue he submitted, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommend to the Board no clemency.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2008 | AR20080019411

    Original file (AR20080019411.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? 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. 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 | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20100030450

    Original file (AR20100030450.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the applicant’s records and the issues and documents submitted with the application, the analyst found no cause for clemency and therefore recommends to the Board to deny clemency. 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,...