Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01002
Original file (MD02-01002.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD02-01002

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review, received 020708, 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 030722. 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.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as submitted

 1. During my stay with the Marine Corps I served to the best of my ability and I received a Good Conduct Medal and a National defense Service Medal. I do not feel that I should be penalized for the rest of my life for a bad decision that I made as a teenager at the age of 18. The reason I am requesting an upgrade is due to the fact that when I was in the USMC, I was only 18 years old and I made some decisions that were not in the best interest of my future nor the best interest of the Marine Corps. I had some serious family issues at the time which caused me to make some bad decisions that I do not feel that I should have to pay for the rest of my adult life. I am currently trying to get my life back on the right track and I feel that this upgrade would be a step in the right direction.
At the time I did not realize the ramifications of the decisions that I made would be so detrimental to me for the rest of my life or I would not have made those choices. I realize now that I should have stayed in the Marine Corps and finished my tour of duty so that I would not be suffering for my mistakes in the years to come.

 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              None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                900904 - 910715  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 910716               Date of Discharge: 951101

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 05 20
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 19                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 37

 Highest Rank: PFC

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.2 (6)                       Conduct: 3.3 (6)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: Rifle Marksman Badge, NDSM

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 635

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 :

920115:  NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 128: Aboard MCB, Camp Geiger, NC, 1930, 920115, assaulted PFC B__, by putting a knife to his throat.
         Award: Forfeiture of $205.00 pay per month for 1 month, restriction and extra duty for 14 days (suspended for 3 months). No indication of appeal in the record.
920410:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Frequent involvement with military/civilian authorities and minor incidents prejudicial to good order and discipline.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.

920730:  Declared a deserter.

940317:  Applicant apprehended civil authorities 0924, 940317 in Bronx, NY.

940317:  To confinement.

940425:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 85: Did, on or about 920730, without authority and with intent to remain therefrom permanently, absent himself from his unit, to wit: 1 ST Battalion, 8 th Marine Regiment, 2 nd Marine Division, Fleet Marine Force, Atlantic, located at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and did remain so absent in desertion until he was apprehended on or about 940316.
         Findings: to Charge I and specification thereunder, not guilty, but guilty of the lesser offense of Article 86.
         Sentence: Confinement for 70 days, forfeiture of $500.00 pay per month for 3 months, reduction to E-1, and a bad conduct discharge.
         CA 940928: Sentence approved and except for that part of the sentence extending to a BCD will be executed, but the execution of that part of the sentence extending to confinement in excess of 50 days is suspended for a period of 6 months from the date of trial, at which time, unless sooner vacated, the suspended part of the sentence will be remitted without further action.

940425:  Applicant waived clemency review [Extracted from NC&PB Computer System].

941214:  To appellate leave.

950428:  NMCCMR: Affirmed findings and sentence.

950927:  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 951101 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). 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 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.
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 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 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

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00827

    Original file (MD04-00827.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD04-00827 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20040421. I never denied what I did was wrong but I have had to pay for my crime for the past 10- years. Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 8 pages for Applicant’s medical record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00920

    Original file (ND99-00920.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00920 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990630, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. No indication of appeal in the record.940324: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.940325: Applicant advised of his rights and having elected not to consult with...

  • 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 | 2000_Marine | MD00-00798

    Original file (MD00-00798.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (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 of his post-service conduct. At this time the applicant has not provided any documentation of good character and conduct. PART IV - INFORMATION FOR THE APPLICANT If you believe that the decision in...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00875

    Original file (MD99-00875.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD99-00875 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 990609, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions, that the RE code be upgraded, and the reason for the discharge be changed to convenience of the government. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the...

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-01080

    Original file (MD99-01080.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    880219: SSPCMO: Article 71c, UCMJ, having been complied with, Bad Conduct discharge ordered executed. 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 response to the applicant’s issues 1 through 4, r 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 | MD03-00811

    Original file (MD03-00811.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19960925 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00057

    Original file (MD03-00057.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19970128 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). 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01033

    Original file (MD02-01033.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 970909 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00511

    Original file (MD02-00511.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION Semper Fi Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:DD Form 180 Copy of DD Form 214Eighteen pages from Applicant's service record PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active: USMC 911029 - 951028 HON Inactive: USMCR(J) 910618 - 911028 COG Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 960213 Date...