Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00474
Original file (MD02-00474.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


ex-PVT, USMC
Docket No. MD02-00474

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020226, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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 021115. 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, as submitted
1. On July 12, 1988 in a special court martial I pled guilty to "Article 86 unauthorized absence" and Article 87 missing a ship movement". Under the advice of counsel I made this plea with the understanding I would receive a bad conduct discharge with the option of upgrade or review at a later date. I was not advised by counsel or by "certified mail" (see attached) that I had a certain amount of time to appeal the courts decision. The court made their final decision on March 7, 1989. I never received any certified mail containing the paper work for my appeal process… and would have appealed the decision "immediately"…. I would now ask the board for a review or for at least to consider the fact I was not contacted formally or their decision…is there a possibility you or my S.R.B. has notification of the certified letter. If so, can I get paper work to file for an appeal? Can I still appeal the courts?
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copies of Supplementary Action and Special Court Martial Order (2)
Letter from Applicant (2 pages)
 Copy of Request for Voluntary Appellate Leave
Copy of Appellate Leave Order
Copy of Record of Conviction by Court Martial
Copy of DD Form 214

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              None
          Inactive: USMCR(J)                850530 - 851014  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 851015               Date of Discharge: 901107

 Length of Service (years, months, days):
         Active: 05 00 24 (Lost time included)
          Inactive: None
Age at Entry: 23                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 60
Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):
Proficiency: 4.0 (6)                       Conduct: 4.0 (6)

 Military Decorations: None
Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Sharpshooter Rifle Badge, GCM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 16

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 :

860618:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 111: Did at CamPen, 0255, 860523, drive while drunk.
         Award: Reduction to E-1 (suspended for 3 months). Not appealed.
861125:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Frequent involvement with military authorities; frequent violations of the UCMJ; and frequent disobedience of lawful orders.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
880712:  Special Court-Martial.
          Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 86:
          Specification: UA from unit 880405 until 880421 (16 days/A).
         Charge II: violation of the UCMJ, Article 87.
          Specification: Through design miss movement on 880413.
          Findings: to Charge I and specification thereunder, guilty. To Charge II and specification thereunder, guilty.
         Sentence: CHL for 60 days, forfeiture of $447.00 pay per month for 2 months, reduction to E-1, and a bad conduct discharge.
          CA 870712: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the bad conduct discharge, but the execution of that portion of the sentence thereof adjudging confinement in excess of 45 days is hereby suspended for a period of six months from the date of trial, at which time, unless sooner vacated, the suspended confinement will be remitted without further action.
880712:  To confinement, sentence of SPCM.

 880804:  From confinement, to duty.
880816:  To appellate leave.
890117:  NC&PB denied clemency and restoration.

 890307:  NMCCMR: Affirmed findings and sentence.

890818:  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 901107 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).
Issue 1. 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). The Applicant’s case was considered under the pertinent standards of equity to determine if any factors in this particular case merited clemency. The Board found nothing in the documentation available for review to support the Applicant’s allegation that he was unfairly denied an opportunity to appeal his court-martial. The Applicant’s case was reviewed by the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review which affirmed both the sentence and findings of the special court-martial. The Applicant has the right to petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records, 2 Navy Annex, Washington, D.C. 20370-5100 to review perceived injustices regarding his military record. 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. Relief denied.
There is no law, or regulation, which provides that an unfavorable discharge may be upgraded based solely on the passage of time, or good conduct in civilian life, subsequent to leaving the service. However, the Applicant is reminded that he remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of his discharge. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.


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 86, unauthorized absence; Article 87, missing ship’s movement.
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 | 1999_Marine | MD99-00441

    Original file (MD99-00441.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The applicant stated, “my rights as an individual were infringed upon…” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Statement from applicant Letter from NMCARA (2pgs) NMCCMR decision (2pgs) Copy of SPCM Convening Authority Action (3pgs) Copy of Letter to Transfer to Appellate Leave Copy of SPCM Supplemental Order Copy of DD Form 214 Letter from Appellate...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01291

    Original file (MD03-01291.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 Affidavit with Issue 4 above (6 pp.) 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 for more than 30 days. The names, and votes of the members of the Board are...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00333

    Original file (MD00-00333.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    To Charge III and specification thereunder, guilty Sentence: Confinement for four months, forfeiture of $438.00 pay per mouth for four months, and a bad conduct discharge. 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).The applicant's issue states: "(Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874(b) (UCMJ) Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174c, enclosure...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501512

    Original file (ND0501512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:DD Form 149 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: None Active: None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 19870924 Date of Discharge: 20010205 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 13 04 12 (Does not exclude lost time.) Sentence: Confinement for 65 days, and to be discharge...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500355

    Original file (MD0500355.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-00355 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20041216. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 20000121 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00702

    Original file (MD02-00702.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Documentation In addition to the service record (there was no DD FORM 214), the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Certificate of Completion (Marine Rifleman Combat Skills) Commanding General’s Voluntary Leave Awaiting Appellate Review Letter dated August 4, 1992 (2 pages) PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC None Inactive:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00579

    Original file (ND01-00579.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), paragraphs 2.24 and 9.3, this former member requests the Board's clemency relief with up-grade of his characterization of service to under honorable conditions on the basis...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501091

    Original file (MD0501091.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Sentence: Confinement for 6 months, forfeiture of $583 per month for 6 months, reduction to E-1, 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 for more than 30 days, and Article 87, missing movement through design.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00660

    Original file (MD04-00660.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pvt H_ (Applicant) was not unfairly given a Bad Conduct Discharge for this charge. Mr. H_ (Applicant) understands that he will never be able to make up for his lost time in the Marine Corps, however now its time we focus on the future. [Microfiche unreadable]980718: GCMCA [Commander, Marine Corps Base Hawaii] directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse.980813: Special Court-Martial.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501428

    Original file (MD0501428.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD05-01428 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20050824. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record, issues submitted, and post service accomplishments, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial was appropriate for the offenses he committed. The Applicant provided two letters of recommendation, a community college diploma and a certificate of training as documentation of...