Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 09737-09
Original file (09737-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

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

 

CRS
Docket No: 9737-09"
7 Aprii 2010

 

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, gitting in executive session, considered your
application on 31 March 2010. 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 27 April
1975. You received nonjudicial punishment on two occasions and
were convicted by two special courts-martial. Your offenses
included unauthorized absences and disobedience of a lawful
order. On 14 February 1975 you were convicted by civil
authorities of armed robbery, and sentenced to confinement for 4
term of not less than five years nor more than ten years.

On 2 April 1975 your commanding officer recommended that you be
separated with an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct
due to civil conviction. After review by the discharge
authority, the recommendation for separation was approved and you
- were discharged on 7 April 1975 with an undesirable discharge.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
service, and numerous contentions concerning your civilian trial,
but found those factors insufficient to warrant
recharacterization of your service, given the very serious nature
of your offense. 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,

WNuauf

W. DEAN P R
Executive D ekbor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10640-09

    Original file (10640-09.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 10 February 1975 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for the foregoing periods of UA totalling 452 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 09397-08

    Original file (09397-08.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 January 2010. 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. 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 | CY2008 | 11838-08

    Original file (11838-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 October 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. Subsequently, your case was forwarded, and on 1 June 1976 the separation authority approved the recommendation for an undesirable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01622-01

    Original file (01622-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session., considered your application on 26 September 2001. 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...

  • 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00061-07

    Original file (00061-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 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. Subsequently, the discharge authority concurred with the ADB and directed that you receive an undesirable discharge due to misconduct on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY1998 | 03990-98

    Original file (03990-98.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 1999. 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 | CY2008 | 06958-08

    Original file (06958-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 19 May 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 % August 1975, the discharge authority directed that you receive an undesirable discharge due to civil conviction.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07839-01

    Original file (07839-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENTOFTHE NAV Y BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S 2 NAVY ANNE X WASHINGTON DC 20370.510 0 TJR Docket No: 7839-01 15 May 2002 This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. sitting,in executive session, considered your A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, application on 14 May 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04580-01

    Original file (04580-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    statement from the American Legion in The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and immaturity, support of your case, and your contention that you did not know The Board also that you had received an undesirable discharge. the Board concluded these factors and Concerning your contention of inadequate assistance of counsel, the Board noted that this Sixth Amendment right does not apply...