Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03695-03
Original file (03695-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE  NAVY 

BOARD  FOR  C O R R E C T I O N O F   N A V A L R E C O R D S  

2   N A V Y A N N E X  

WASHINGTON  D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

FC 
Docket No: 3695-03 
27 October 2003 

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 22 October 2003.  Your allegations of error and 
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, and applicable statutes, regulations and 
policies.  The Board was unable to obtain your official record, 
and conducted its review based on the copies of the record that 
you submitted. 

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 Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 20 
February 1956 at age 17.  You then served without incident until 
8 July 1957, when you received nonjudicial punishment  (NJP) for 
carrying a concealed knife and were awarded a reduction to 
paygrade E-1.  A service record entry of 3 April 1958 indicates 
that administrative separation processing for unfitness due to 
repeated venereal infection was suspended because of your 
rotation back to the United States.  During the period 2 February 
to 1 June 1959 you received three more NJPs for disrespect, 
failure to obey a lawful order, and a brief period of 
unauthorized absence (UA) . 

On 17 June 1959 you were informed of administrative separation 
processing by reason of misconduct due to frequent involvement of 

a discreditable nature with civil or military authorities, and 
you elected to retain all of your procedural rights.  On 22 June 
1959 the commanding officer recommended an undesirable discharge. 
On 30 June 1959 an administrative discharge board  (ADB) 
recommended that you be retained in the Marine Corps.  In July 
1959, the separation authority approved the findings of the ADB 
and you were retained in the Marine Corps. 

On 19 April 1960 you were convicted in civil court of first 
degree robbery and sentenced to five years in prison.  When you 
were informed that administrative separation action had been 
initiated due to the civil conviction, you again elected to 
retain all of your procedural rights.  On 20 May 1960 the 
commanding officer recommended an undesirable discharge by reason 
of misconduct due to the conviction.  On 20 June 1960 an ADB 
found misconduct due to civil conviction, and recommended an 
undesirable discharge.  Subsequently, the separation authority 
approved the ADB1s findings and recommendation.  On 22 July 1960 
you received an undesirable discharge. 

In its review of your case, the Board carefully weighed all 
potentially mitigating factors such as your youth and 
immaturity, the time that has passed since you were discharged 
from the Marine Corps, and your good post service adjustment. 
However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient 
to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of the 
serious nature of your misconduct that resulted in a civil 
conviction for first-degree robbery as well as the prior 
misconduct that resulted in four NJPs.  Furthermore, the Board 
noted that you were given an opportunity to earn a better 
characterization of service when you were retained in the Marine 
Corps after the first ADB.  However, you failed to take 
advantage of this opportunity and subsequently committed the 
offense of first degree robbery.  Accordingly, your application 
has been denied.  The names and votes of the members of the 
panel will be furnished upon request. 

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such 
that favorable action cannot be taken.  You are entitled to have 
the 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 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, 

Executive D 



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01223-02

    Original file (01223-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 22 May 2002. 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. foregoing factors and...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08643-01

    Original file (08643-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 June 2002. On 6 October 1977 an ADB recommended an other than honorable discharge by reasion of misconduct due to civil conviction. 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10329-02

    Original file (10329-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 11 May and again on 16 July 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), failure to obey a lawful order, absence from your appointed place of duty, resisting arrest, and breach of the peace. The Board, in its review of your...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 00780-03

    Original file (00780-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. However, the Board found that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your misconduct that resulted in three NJPs, a SCM conviction for a lengthy period of unauthorized absence, and the civil conviction for drug possession. Consequently, when applying for a...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06453-01

    Original file (06453-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 February 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of Board. the disciplinary action taken, paygrade E-l and a $50 forfeiture of However, the record does not reflect if any, for these periods of UA. Consequently, when...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00736-12

    Original file (00736-12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 October 2012. 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 28 November 1967 the discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed your commanding officer to issue you an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 09552-02

    Original file (09552-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 April 2003. 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, the Board found that you were appropriately discharged by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction for your conviction by civil...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02892-07

    Original file (02892-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, on 23 November 1956 an ADB recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. On 11 December 1956 the discharge authority approved these recommendations and directed an undesirable discharge, and on 4 January 1957, while in the custody of civil...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10197-02

    Original file (10197-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 September 2003. imposed was reduction to On 11 March and again on 5 May 1959 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of two periods of unauthorized absence (UA) totalling three days and breaking restriction. January 1961 the discharge authority then directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness due to frequent involvement of a discreditable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09625-08

    Original file (09625-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel’ of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 August 2009. 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 17 June 1976, the discharge authority directed that you be separated with an undesirable discharge by reason of civil conviction.