Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 01228-10
Original file (01228-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

CRS
Docket No: 1228-19
7 April 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 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 reenlisted in the Navy on 30 April 1982.
On 10 July 1985 a special court-martial convened and found you
guilty of an assault with a fire axe and communicating a threat
to kill. The court sentenced you to confinement at hard labor
for 120 days, forfeiture of $200.00 per month for two months,
reduction in vank, and a bad conduct discharge. You were so
discharged on 6 September 1988.

In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, overall
service, and the contention that your rights were denied by the
special court-martial. The Board conciuded that those factors
were insufficient to warrant recharacterization of your service,
given the serious nature of the misconduct which resulted in your
discharge. In addition, the Board noted that it has no authority
to disturb the findings or sentence of a court-martial based on
claims of legal error. 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.
Consequentiy, 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,
lb Neuss
Executive Di or

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03878-09

    Original file (03878-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 April 2010. On 7 January 1953, you were convicted by SPCM of an 18 day period of UA from your unit. 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 | CY2009 | 06052-09

    Original file (06052-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 21 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. On 27 August 1954 you were so discharged.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03926-09

    Original file (03926-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 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. You requested suspension of the BCD and restoration to earn an honorable discharge.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 10980-09

    Original file (10980-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 July 2010. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your three NUP’s, SCM, and especially your SPCM conviction for very serious misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04295-10

    Original file (04295-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board did not consider your request for correction of your reentry code as that request was previously denied, and you have not submitted any new material evidence concerning that request. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 September 2010. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04682-09

    Original file (04682-09.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 29 June 1955, you were convicted by special court - martial (SPCM) of 35 day period of UA from your unit. 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 | CY2009 | 06214-09

    Original file (06214-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 27 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. 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 | 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 | CY2010 | 01415-10

    Original file (01415-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 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. On 25 June 1973 you received NUP for six periods of absence from your appointed place of duty and a one day period of UA.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 04143-09

    Original file (04143-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 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...