Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05397-07
Original file (05397-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                             2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5 00



                                                      TRG
         Docket No: 5397-07
        28 March 2008

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-me mb er panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on.25 March 2008. 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, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
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.
You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 10 October 1960 at age 17. On 17 November 1961 you were convicted by civil authorities of petty larceny and were released on six months probation. During the period from 27 November 1961 to 3 May 1963, you received nonjudicial punishment on four occasions and were convicted by a summary and a special court-martial. Your offenses included four periods of unauthorized absence totaling about 35 days, several absences from your appointed place of duty, breaking restriction, writing bad checks and disobedience.
On 16 July 1963 you were convicted by civil authorities in North Carolina of writing bad checks. There is no sentence in the record but about that time, you were charged with 13 days of unauthorized absence, which may have been the time you were held by civil authorities. On 4 November 1963 you were again convicted by civil authorities on a charge of breach of trust with fraudulent intent and were sentenced to nine months in jail.
Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an administrative discharge. In connection with this processing, you apparently elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge board. Subsequently, your commanding officer recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness.
On 10 December 1963 the local sheriff informed your command that you were being transferred to the state penitentiary to complete the remainder of your sentence and stated that upon completion of the sentence you would be tried for escape from the county jail.
On 10 January 1964 the discharge authority approved the recommendation of your commanding officer and directed an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness. You received the undesirable discharge on 5 March 1964.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and contention, in effect, that you learned your lesson and have been a model citizen since your discharge. The Board found that these factors and contention were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your frequent and serious misconduct. The Board concluded that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
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,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04902-09

    Original file (04902-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2010. 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge because of your misconduct that...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 06163-07

    Original file (06163-07.rtf) 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.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 1 March 1961, you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 with parental consent and served without...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 00632-02

    Original file (00632-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 May 2002. 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. CNP further directed that you be advised that you were being placed in a probationary status for a period of 12 months and that the CO was authorized to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08444.07

    Original file (08444.07.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, after two failures to appear in court, you were convicted of DUI on 14 June 1972. On 20 June 1972, you received NUP for 27 days of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08444-07

    Original file (08444-07.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, after two failures to appear in court, you were convicted of DUI on 14 June 1972. On 20 June 1972, you received NUP for 27 days of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 09602-07

    Original file (09602-07.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. Subsequently, your case was forwarded, and on 20 July 1967 the discharge authority approved the recommendation for an undesirable discharge. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07927-07

    Original file (07927-07.rtf) 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.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Marine Corps on 3 April 1961 at age 17. On 10 February 1965 an ADB recommended an...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 06118-08

    Original file (06118-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 February 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 7 June 1966 the command recommended you for an undesirable discharge due to the civil conviction but also recommended that the discharge be...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04245-09

    Original file (04245-09.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 March 2010. On 29 April 1965, your commanding officer forwarded your case concurring with the Boards’ findings and recommendation that you receive an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness. 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 | CY2008 | 02008-08

    Original file (02008-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 December 2008. 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 13 April 1962 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of absence from your appointed place of duty and sentenced to hard labor for...