Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00093
Original file (MD00-00093.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD (NDRB)
 DISCHARGE REVIEW
DECISIONAL DOCUMENT

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00093

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 991019, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. The applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 000622. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain: BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

The NDRB did note an administrative error on the original DD Form 214. Block 18, Remarks, should contain the following statement: "CONTINUOUS HONORABLE ACTIVE SERVICE FROM 07JUN88 - 06FEB92". The original DD Form 214 should be corrected or reissued as appropriate.




PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. Upon review of Original Record of Trial Review, I, C_ D. Z_ (Applicant), do find the Judge's decision to be harsh and rash. The fact that an ex-Marine's daughter was involved also stimulated the final decision. During the trial there was no evidence presented to find the accused guilty of such accusations. I feel strongly that I have been taken advantage of and would like for justice to be served on my behalf.

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214
Applicant's Record of Trial/Review

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              880607 - 920206  HON
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                870618 - 880606  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920207               Date of Discharge: 980814

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 06 06 08 (Doesn't exclude lost time/confinement time)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 22                          Years Contracted: 4 (15 months extension)

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 54

 Highest Rank: Sgt

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages: All enlisted performance reports for this enlistment were available to the Board for review.

 Military Decorations: NAM

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: NUC, MUC, GCM(w/1 Star), NDSM, SWASM, SSDR (w/1 Star), KLM (2), CC, MM, LOA (3), COA (3), Rifle Marksmanship Badge

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 109

Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):

BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

920207:  Reenlisted for term of four years at 1 ST LAIBN 1 ST MARDIV, FMF, Camp Pendleton, CA.

960207:  Extended enlistment for 15 months.

960220:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct [financial irresponsibility - specifically the lack of dependent support]. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
960513:  Unauthorized absence since 0730 from HQHQRON NADEP Cherry Point, NC.
960612:  Declared deserter.

 960831:  Apprehended by Highway Patrol, Hampton, SC, at 2215 and was delivered to command at 2200, 04SEP96. (109 days)

 960905:  To pre-trail confinement.

 961021:  Special Court-Martial. (21 Oct 96 - 4 Nov 96)
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 85.
         Specification: did, on or about 13 May 96, without authority and with intent to remain away thereform permanently, absent himself from his unit, to wit: Naval Aviation Depot, Headquarters and Headquarters Squadron, located at Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, N.C., and did remain so absent in desertion until he was apprehended on or about 31 August 1996.
         Charge II: violation of UCMJ, Article 128.
         Specification: did, on board Marine Corps Air Station, Cherry Point, N.C., on or about 11 May 1996, unlawfully touch D_ F_ by placing his hand on her thigh, grabbing her wrist and shirt with his hands, pushing her with hands and ripping her shirt with his hands.
         Finding: to Charge I and the specification thereunder, guilty except words "and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently" and "in desertion".
         Finding: to Charge II and the specification thereunder, guilty
         Sentence: Bad Conduct Discharge, confinement for 120 days, forfeiture of $580.00 pay per month for four months and reduction to E-1.
         CA action 970428: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for execution of bad conduct discharge.

961104:  To confinement, Sentence of SPCM.

961104:  Applicant waived clemency review.

961208:  From confinement, to duty.

970724:  To appellate leave.

980226:  NMCCMR: Affirmed findings and sentence.

980717:  COMA: Petition for review denied.

980814:  SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The applicant was discharged on 980814 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed in the legal chain of review and executed (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).

 Relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. (B, Part IV) The applicant's case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The NDRB found the applicant’s service record devoid of any mitigating or extenuating factors sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. The applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided that an application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge.



Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURT-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16E), effective 950818 until present.

B. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article [ e.g., Article 86, unauthorized absence for more than 30 days].
C. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 2, AUTHORITY/POLICY FOR DEPARTMENTAL DISCHARGE REVIEW.

D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.2, PROPRIETY OF THE DISCHARGE.

E. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174C of 22 August 1984 (Manual for Discharge Review, 1984), enclosure (1), Chapter 9, paragraph 9.3, EQUITY OF THE DISCHARGE.

PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT
If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues you raised, or does not otherwise comport with the decisional document requirements of DoD Directive 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Directive. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint. The complaint procedure does not permit a challenge of the merits of the decision; it is designed solely to ensure that the decisional documents meet applicable requirements for clarity and responsiveness. You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ afls14.jag.af.mil ”.

The names, and votes of the members of the Board are recorded on the original of this document and may be obtained from the service records by writing to:

                  Naval Council of Personnel Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023      


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00371

    Original file (MD01-00371.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, NDRB discerned no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the applicant’s service. (Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the Board's clemency relief with up-grade of her characterization of service to under honorable conditions on the basis...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-01040

    Original file (MD00-01040.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD00-01040 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 000907, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions, entry-level separation or uncharacterized. The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 900821 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01342

    Original file (MD02-01342.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19980629 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court-martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed by appellate review authority and executed (A and B). Relief not warranted.The Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received at the NDRB within 15...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00902

    Original file (MD01-00902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Character Reference ltr from former Marine, R_ D. B_, dtd June 22, 2001 Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 950918 - 951204 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 951205 Date of Discharge: 980518 Length of Service (years, months,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00221

    Original file (MD02-00221.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214Navy & Marine Corps Appellate Leave Activity, Wash DC, ltr of 3 Oct 97 concerning applicant's punitive discharge from active dutySSPCMO #97-1656 DTD 23 Oct 97 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 950713 - 951029 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00956

    Original file (MD03-00956.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Sentence: Confinement for 23 days, and a bad conduct discharge. The Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon conviction by a special or general court-martial for violation of the UCMJ, Article 86, unauthorized absence; Article 91, disobey the order of a NCO; Article 92, disobey a lawful order; and Article 112a, possession of drug paraphernalia.

  • USMC | DRB | 1998_Marine | MD98-00025

    Original file (MD98-00025.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    c. In the course of a discharge review, it is determined that relief is warranted based upon consideration of the applicant's service record and other evidence presented to the NDRB viewed in conjunction with the factors listed in this paragraph and the regulations under which the applicant was discharged, even though the discharge was determined to have been otherwise equitable and proper at the time of issuance. PART V - RATIONALE FOR DECISION Discussion After a thorough review of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00268

    Original file (MD03-00268.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19970709 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by special court-martial that was determined to be legal and proper by appellate review authority. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (D and E).In the Applicant’s issue 1, the Board...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00241

    Original file (MD02-00241.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 970103 - 970121 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 970122 Date of Discharge: 010502 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 03 11 Inactive: None PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00141

    Original file (MD00-00141.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I, R_ D_ C_ (Applicant), XXX-XX-XXXX. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970728 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court martial that was determined to be legal and proper, affirmed in the legal chain of review and executed (A and B). With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency...