Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00895
Original file (MD03-00895.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD03-00895

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030416. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. The Applicant requests 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 20040303. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, no impropriety or inequity in the characterization of the Applicant’s service was discovered by the NDRB. 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 stated
Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

1. “ I do hereby ask that in your infinite wisdom you forgive my immature impulsive action of leaving for which I cannot ever amend or change and at this time consider my humble request for an upgrade to my discharge. Although my infraction has put a permanent smudge on my career as a good soldier, I hope that my accomplishments as a soldier do not go un-noticed and bear some considerations.

With your forgiveness and permission, one day I would like to be a good soldier to my country again. Along with me, my country is suffering right now. My fellow soldier is standing proud and explifying what a good soldier is and what our country stands for. May I one day shine in their light and they shine in mine.

I respectfully and earnestly await your reply.”
Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Copy of DD Form 214 from previous enlistment
 Nineteen pages from Applicant’s service record
Letter from Applicant
Letter from F_ J. M_
Test Scores dated February 2, 1995
Letter of congratulations for Arborist Certification
Certificate of completion for landscape seminar
Certificate of completion for horticultural seminar
Employee of the Month for October 1997
Certificate for Certified Arborist
Letter of congratulations for passing requirements to be a Certified Tree Worker
Certified Tree Worker policy extract (2 pp.)
Certified Tree Worker examination certificate
Certificate of completion dated December 15, 1999
Newspaper article copy

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: USMC              800724 - 831129  HON
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                800212 - 800723  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 831130               Date of Discharge: 920916

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 02 00 28 (Does not include UA period and appellate leave)
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 21                          Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 40

 Highest Rank: Cpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.6 (16)                      Conduct: 4.1 (17)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, MM, GCM, NDSM, CoA, LoA

Days of Unauthorized Absence: 1985

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 :

910508:  Special Court-Martial.
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 85: On 850729 without authority and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently, absent from unit until apprehended on 910104.
         Findings: Guilty to the lesser included offense of Article 86, UCMJ excepting the words, “and with intent to remain away therefrom permanently.” Of the excepting words, NG; of the specification as excepted, Guilty.
         Sentence: Fine of $500.00, restriction for 2 months, reduction to E-1, confinement for two months and a bad conduct discharge.
         CA 911008: Sentence approved and ordered executed except for the BCD. Confinement suspended for 12 months.
        
910530:  To appellate leave.

920117:  NMCCMR: Affirmed findings and sentence.

920730:  NC&PB denied clemency and restoration.
920916:  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 19920916 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. That sentence was subsequently approved by both the convening and appellate review authorities (A and B). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (C).

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 and documentation provided for review absent of any mitigating or extenuating factors sufficient to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. Additionally, 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. 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 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 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.

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 | 2000_Marine | MD00-01076

    Original file (MD00-01076.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requested a documentary record discharge review. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 971120 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).

  • USMC | DRB | 2001_Marine | MD01-01027

    Original file (MD01-01027.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    I would like to ask the Board for an upgrade in my discharge; my issues are I was an honest marine up until the one and only mistake I have ever made in my life. (Signed by the Applicant)Dear Chairperson:After review of the Former Service Members (FSM) DD Form 293 Application for the Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of the United States and all of the evidence assembled for review, the FSM request to have his discharge upgraded from Bad Conduct Discharge to one of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01002

    Original file (MD02-01002.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 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 Manual for Courts-Martial authorizes the award of a punitive discharge if adjudged as part of the sentence upon...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00788

    Original file (MD04-00788.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1105.. PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and issues submitted, 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 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00525

    Original file (MD02-00525.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00525 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020305, requested that the characterization of service and reason for discharge be changed. 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) 891006 - 900312 COG Period of Service Under...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500067

    Original file (MD0500067.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 19941123 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged by a properly convened special court-martial. Issues 1, 2 and 4: With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and documented post-service accomplishments, the Board determined that...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00668

    Original file (MD02-00668.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At this time, I would like to ask that my case be reviewed and that my Bad Conduct Discharge be upgraded to a General Discharge. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The Applicant was discharged on 011015 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 Manual for Courts-Martial...

  • USMC | DRB | 2000_Marine | MD00-00093

    Original file (MD00-00093.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. 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:...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-01477

    Original file (MD04-01477.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to uncharacterized and the reason for the discharge be changed to entry level separation. Character, Narrative Reason, and Authority of Discharge (at time of issuance):BAD CONDUCT DISCHARGE/COURT-MARTIAL, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 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...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00375

    Original file (MD04-00375.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Sentence: Reduction to E-1, and a bad conduct discharge. 880811: Staff Judge Advocate’s review of BCD Special Court-Martial indicates the awarded sentence was legal. 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 P1900.16C), effective 821001 until 890626.