DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No:
28 June 2001
5591-00
Dear
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the United
States Code section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 26 June 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board.
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies.
Your allegations of error and
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice.
The record shows that you were released from active duty in the
Army on 16 June 1986 with your service characterized as
On 20 June 1986 you enlisted in the Marine Corps. A
honorable.
general court-martial convened on 1 April 1992 and convicted you
of disrespect, four instances of making false official
statements, two instances of making false claims against the
government, and wrongfully wearing awards and insignia to which
The court sentenced you to reduction to
you were not entitled.
pay grade E-l, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement
at hard labor for 15 months and a dishonorable discharge.
Portions of the confinement and forfeitures were suspended for 12
months.
The record shows that on 6 March 1995 the U. S.
you began appellate leave
After your release from confinement,
and remained in that status until the dishonorable discharge was
Navy-
issued.
Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals reviewed the proceedings
and set aside the finding of guilty to the charge of disrespect
A majority of the court
but affirmed the remaining findings.
concluded that the sentence was appropriate for the remaining
charges and specifications.
concluding that a bad conduct discharge would be more
However, one judge dissented,
appropriate.
Subsequently, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces set aside
the Court of Criminal Appeals decision and remanded the case for
On 11 March
further review of new issues raised in your case.
1996, the Court of Criminal Appeals again set aside your
conviction of disrespect,
once again found, on a split vote, that the sentence was
appropriate for the remaining offenses.
discharge was issued on 6 February 1997.
affirmed the remaining findings and
The dishonorable
‘ In your application, you contend that you were improperly
convicted by the general court-martial.
that if your Army record had not been lost you could establish
your entitlement to the awards and devices and could confirm the
medical problems you were accused of lying about during the
You state that you are
physical evaluation board hearing.
currently a doctoral candidate in history and have submitted a
lengthy listing of youracademic and publishing accomplishments.
You assert, in effect,
The Board is prevented by law from reviewing the findings of
courts-martial and must limit its review to determining if the
sentence should be reduced as a matter of clemency.
Board noted that you pled guilty to the offenses of which you
were convicted and the conviction was affirmed on two successive
reviews by the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals.
However, the
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors,
such as your prior honorable service in the Army and your claim
of a successful post service adjustment, against the charges of
The Board found that the mitigating
which you were convicted.
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given the nature of the charges of which you were
convicted.
The Board noted the opinion of the appellate military judge to
the effect that the dishonorable discharge should be changed to a
bad conduct discharge.
Along these lines, the
dishonorable discharge was appropriate.
Board noted that a bad conduct discharge would still be very
stigmatizing and would not afford you any greater benefits than
the dishonorable discharge now of record.
However, the Board concluded that the
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
It is regretted
that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
2
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
3
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 06867-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. On 6 November 2002, the Naval Clemency Board mitigated the dishonorable discharge to a bad conduct discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012400
This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. If the sentence, as approved by the convening authority, includes a bad-conduct discharge, a dishonorable discharge, dismissal of an officer, or confinement for one year or more, the case is reviewed by the U.S. Army Court of Criminal...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012769
The DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) he was issued shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Separations), chapter 3, section IV, as the result of court-martial, with a dishonorable discharge. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. Therefore, clemency in the form of an honorable or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015559
The applicant requests his dishonorable discharge be upgraded to a general, under honorable conditions discharge, an under other than honorable conditions discharge, or a bad conduct discharge. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. His conviction, confinement, and discharge...
NAVY | BCNR | CY1999 | 05889-98
5889-98 19 April 1999 Dear &$;:;: This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code, Section 1552. application for correction of your provisions of Title 10, United A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 April 1999. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090007265
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 20 October 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090007265 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. On 15 October 1986, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review ordered that the findings of guilty for Specifications 1 and 5 of the charge be set aside and dismissed and that the action of the convening authority, dated 19 July 1983, be set aside and the record of trial be returned to The Judge Advocate General for a new review and action by a different convening authority. ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013135
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110013135 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Accordingly, he was discharged on 11 June 1987 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations Enlisted Personnel), by reason of court-martial with a bad conduct discharge. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the final discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which he was...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012426
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests that his bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general under honorable conditions. It stipulates that a Soldier would 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 affirmed before the sentence was ordered duly executed.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00327-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, during the seven month period from March 1973 to October 1973 you received four nonjudicial punishments ( N J P ) and were convicted by a summary court-martial. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007660
This form further shows he completed 1 year, 3 months, and 3 days of creditable military service during this period and he had lost time on 9 October 1986 and from 10 October 1986 to 29 January 1987. There is no indication he petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for a review of his discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and the discharge appropriately characterizes the...