Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 11873-09
Original file (11873-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SIN

Docket No: 11873-09
30 August 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, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 24 August 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Marine Corps and began a period of active
duty on 13 December 1988. The Board found you served without
incident for over 20 years until 19 June 2009, when you were
convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of maltreatment and
making a false statement. You were sentenced to a forfeiture of
pay. Further, the Board found you entered into a pretrial
agreement to plead guilty to certain charges and specifications.
Prior to entering this agreement, you conferred with a qualified
military lawyer, were advised of your rights, the meaning and
effect of your guilty pleas, and there attendant effects and
consequences.

The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your record of over
20 years of honorable service, Good Conduct Medals, and other
numerous awards. Nevertheless, the Board found that these
factors were not sufficient to warrant granting clemency in your
SCM sentence given the pretrial agreement between you and the
convening authority. Finally, the Board is expressly forbidden
From reviewing the findings of guilt rendered by a court-martial
and must restrict its review to the appropriateness of the
sentence. 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,

\Sdeas

W. DEAN P
Executive restor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 03229-02

    Original file (03229-02.rtf) 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 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. 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 | CY2011 | 06217-11

    Original file (06217-11.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 July 2011. Your sentence included a dismissal. 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 | CY2014 | NR10937 14

    Original file (NR10937 14.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 2015. 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 | 06582-08

    Original file (06582-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 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. 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 | CY2003 | 05039-03

    Original file (05039-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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. 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 | CY2010 | 01693-10

    Original file (01693-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 October 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 | CY2006 | 06867-06

    Original file (06867-06.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 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.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 02504-08

    Original file (02504-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 December 2008. As you have been previously informed the Board is prevented by law from reviewing courts-martial and must limit its review to determining if the court-martial sentence should be reduced as a matter of clemency. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 08327-01

    Original file (08327-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Petitioner's SCM record. SCMs;' therefore, the convening 25, UCMJ, criteria apply to authority essentially must "know" the officer who will serve as SCM. Petitioner accepted SCM and made no (l), Summary Court-Martial Officer's Petitioner had two opportunities to object and Petitioner cannot now claim that his SCM was However, he accepted SCM as part of the PTA knowing the convening authority could refer his Additionally, Petitioner t o did not oblect to if he had d. Witness' desire...

  • USMC | DRB | 2013_Marine | MD1301795

    Original file (MD1301795.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A preponderance of the evidence reviewed supports the conclusion that the Applicant committed several serious offenses, that separation from the Marine Corps was appropriate, and that an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization of service was warranted. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the application is received at the NDRB within 15 years of the Applicant’s date of...