Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00552
Original file (MD00-00552.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD00-00552

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 000328, 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 list any representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 001116. 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/As a result of a courts-martial (SPCM) – Other, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues

 1. ( (applicant) (SSN deleted) humbly request that my Bad Conduct Discharge be upgraded. I would also like to thank my command and the Marine Corps for holding me accountable for my actions. I believe in my heart that they in doing so have saved my life, and I am very grateful. I attend a 12 step program regularly and been blessed with the opportunity to help others fight the disease of addiction. I have 4 years clean a good job and I am a member of Mt Carmel Baptist Church. I would like to sincerely apologize to all that I've harmed while trapped in my denial pertaining to my drug abuse. Thank you for taking the time to review my case. Humbly sumitted

 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: USMC              800724 - 840417  HON
                  USMC             840418 - 880128  HON
                  USMC             880129 - 920205  HON
         Inactive: USAR            790514 - 800715  HON
 USMCR(J)                 800716 - 800723  COG
Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 920206               Date of Discharge: 950703

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 04 28
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 30                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 52

 Highest Rank: SSgt

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

Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: GCM (4), Certificate of Commendation, SSDR (3), CAR, NDSM, SASM (3), KLM, MM, NUC, Letter of Appreciation

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: N/A

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

BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/As a result of a courts-martial (SPCM) - other, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 1105.


 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

931020:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112A:
         Specification: Wrongfully use cocaine on 25Feb93.
         Findings: to Charge I and specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 30 days, reduction to LCpl.
         CA 940208: Sentence approved and ordered executed, except for the confinement which is suspended for 6 months unless sooner vacated.

931221:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Illegal drug involvement; specifically, illegal drug usage (cocaine) as verified by NAVDRUGLAB Jacksonville, FL message 111534Z Jun 93.]

940111:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Illegal drug involvement; specifically, illegal drug usage (THC) as verified by NAVDRUGLAB Jacksonville, FL message 040701Z Jan 94

940315:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 112a (2 specifications):
         Specification 1: Wrongfully use marijuana on 21Dec93.
         Specification 2: Wrongfully use marijuana on 19Jan94.
         Findings: to Charge I and specifications thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: Forfeiture of $150.00 per month for 4 months, confinement for 100 days, reduction to Pvt and a bad conduct discharge.
         CA 940520: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD.

940315:  To confinement, Sentence of SPCM.

940603:  From confinement, to duty.

940811:  NC&PB denied clemency.

941018:  To appellate leave.

950228:  NMCCMR: Affirmed findings and sentence.

950703:  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 950703 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).

 With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case tried under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the action of the NDRB extends only to a change in the discharge for purpose of clemency. (B, art IV). The applicant has provided no documentation to substantiate clemency, Issue 1. Relief denied.

The following is provided for the applicant’s edification. The NDRB is authorized to consider post-service factors in the recharacterization of a discharge (E). Outstanding post-service conduct, to the extent that such matters provide a basis for a more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct during the period of service under review, may be considered by the NDRB. Documentation of such performance is required. The applicant is reminded that he is eligible for a personal appearance hearing provided the application is received within 15 years from the date of discharge. Representation at personal appearance hearing is highly recommended.


Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 1105, DISCHARGE ADJUDGED BY SENTENCE OF COURTS-MARTIAL , of the Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, (MCO P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95.

 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      
                  Washington, D.C. 20374-5023     


Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00997

    Original file (MD00-00997.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 (2 copies) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: None Inactive: USMCR(J) 920520 - 920915 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 920916 Date of Discharge: 960411 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 03 06 26 (Doesn't exclude lost or confinement...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00862

    Original file (MD02-00862.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    971031: U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals affirms the findings and sentence of the Special Court-Martial 990823: Navy and Marine Corps Appellate Leave Activity issues Special Court-Martial Supplemental Order stating that, Article 71(c), UCMJ, having been complied with, the Bad Conduct discharge is ordered executed. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00895

    Original file (MD03-00895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19920916 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency (C, Part IV). PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in your case is unclear, not responsive to the issues...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00367

    Original file (MD01-00367.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 901015 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, and affirmed in the legal chain of review and executed (A and B). 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00854

    Original file (MD01-00854.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Thank you for your consideration Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copies of DD Form 214 (2) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive: USMCR(J) 950328 - 950918 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 950919 Date of Discharge: 971106 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 02 00 25 Inactive:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00227

    Original file (MD01-00227.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I've served 11 years 9 months and 28 days of active service and was discharged with a Bad conduct discharge as a result of a Special Court Martial for a violation of Article 114A of the uniform code of Military Justice. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 (2 copies) Discharge Upgrading Questionnaire (10 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00307

    Original file (MD00-00307.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. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 910920 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly constituted special court martial that was determined to...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00606

    Original file (MD02-00606.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00606 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020402, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions or entry level separation or uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to (most appropriate). 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-00922

    Original file (MD01-00922.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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 880701 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...

  • 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...