Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00772-08
Original file (00772-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 772-08
24 September 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-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 17 September 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.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Marine Corps on 28 March
1968. On 9 March 1971 you were convicted by civil authorities of
attempted armed robbery. While not shown in the available

records, it appears that you were sentenced to confinement for
more than one year.

On 15 July 1971 an administrative discharge board recommended
that you be separated from the service with an undesirable
discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction. The
recommendation was approved by the separation authority, and you
were separated from the Marine Corps with an undesirable
discharge on 6 August 1971.

The Board did not accept your unsubstantiated contention to the
effect that you were forced to sign the paperwork for your

discharge. As noted above, you were discharged pursuant to the
approved findings of an administrative discharge board. The

Board concluded that your service was properly characterized with
an undesirable discharge, given the serious nature of your civil
conviction. The Board was not persuaded that it would be in the
interest of justice for it to upgrade your discharge.

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 P R

Executive Dinvektor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03761-07

    Original file (03761-07.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 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 10 May 1971 an ADB recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct due to civil conviction.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00602-08

    Original file (00602-08.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. Furthermore, the Board noted that in addition to your civil conviction, you had an NJP and were convicted by a court-martial. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00127-08

    Original file (00127-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 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 9 August 1972, the discharge authority directed that you be separated with an undesirable discharge by reason of civil conviction.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 07258-08

    Original file (07258-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 August 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. Your request was approved by the discharge authority, and you received an undesirable discharge on 6 January 1972.

  • 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 | CY2009 | 04100-09

    Original file (04100-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 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. 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 | 05652-07

    Original file (05652-07.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 8 February 1971 at age 20. Subsequently, your request for...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07848-07

    Original file (07848-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 May 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 5 January 1973, you were counseled regarding your misconduct and warned that further infractions could result in administrative separation.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04903-01

    Original file (04903-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Your allegations of error and 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 were sentenced to confinement at hard labor On 30 January 1970 you were convicted by SPCM of a 99 day period of UA and were sentenced to confinement at hard labor for a month, restriction for a month, and an $80 forfeiture of pay. submitted a written request for an...