Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01145
Original file (MD03-01145.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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

ex-LCpl, USMC
Docket No. MD03-01145

Applicant’s Request
The application for discharge review was received on 20030618. The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. The Applicant requests a documentary record review. The Applicant did not list any representative on the DD Form 293. In the acknowledgement letter, the Applicant was informed that he was approaching the 15 year point for review by this Board and was encouraged to attend a personal appearance hearing in the Washington, D.C. area. Applicant did not respond.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 20040423. 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: UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct – Commission of a serious offense (all other) with admin discharge board, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Issues, as stated

 Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:

 1. “DEAR MEMBERS,

I AM ONLY ASKING THE BOARD TO CHANGE AND FULFILL WHAT IS DUE TO ME AND WAS PROMISED TO ME.

1) HONORABLE DISCHARGE

2) 6 MONTHS CORPORAL PAY

3) 126 DAYS LEAVE & EARNINGS (L.E.S.) PAY

4) GOOD CONDUCT MEDAL AWARDED AND DUE.

I WAS AWARDED A MRETOTIOUS MAST AFTER SEPARATION. FROM MY WIFE’S
FORMER SQUADRON HSL-30 COMMANDING OFFICER FULL NAVY CAPTAIN.. I WAS AWARDED THIS CITATATION FOR LOVE OF SERVICE, COUNTRY,AND DEVOTION TO MY WIFE 2ND CLASS PETTY OFFICER C_ J_ WHO CONTINUED HER NAVAL CAREER PROUDLY IN MY NAME...

I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE MEMBERS TO EXAMINE MY CASE, SRB,AND ATTORNEYS SUMMARY REPORT AND FOR THE BOARD TO EXERCISE ITS POWERS AND IMPOSE THE APPROPRIATE DISCHARGE, MONIES, AND MEDAL I EARNED AND DESERVE and will greatly appreciate

I THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR TIME AND UNDERSTANDING IN THIS MATTER,

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
A_ L_ J_ ( Applicant )
(Applicant’s mailing address deleted)”

 Documentation
In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:
Standard Form 180
Letter from Applicant, dated June 11, 2003
Letter from Applicant, dated June 11, 2003
“Affidavit” (5 pages)
Eleven pages from Applicant’s service record
Letter from Applicant, dated July 10, 2003

PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

 Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):
         Active: None
         Inactive: USMCR(J)                870124 - 870525  COG

 Period of Service Under Review :
Date of Enlistment: 870526               Date of Discharge: 900905

 Length of Service (years, months, days):

         Active: 03 03 10
         Inactive: None

 Age at Entry: 18                          Years Contracted: 4

 Education Level: 12                        AFQT: 44

 Highest Rank: LCpl

 Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

 Proficiency: 4.5 (6)                       Conduct: 4.6 (6)

 Military Decorations: None

 Unit/Campaign/Service Awards: SSDR, GCM

 Days of Unauthorized Absence: 3

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

UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS/Misconduct-Commission of a serious offense (all other) with admin discharge board, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. 6210.6.

 Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :

880221:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. [Failure to maintain your uniforms in a serviceable condition which result in an unsat grade received during the CG’s JOB inspection of 880217 and an unsat grade received during a reinspection on 880321.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.
900405:  Criminal Court warrant of arrest. Charge: willful, deliberate and premeditate attempt to kill law enforcement officer while in the performance of his duties. Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court warrant of arrest. Charge: While armed with a deadly weapon attempt to break and enter the dwelling house, in the nighttime, of C_ J_, black female, aged 22, his lawful wife, with the intent to commit a felony of any larceny therein. Criminal Court warrant of arrest. Charge: use a firearm during the commission of a felony (attempt murder).
900406:  Emergency Room admission: Sustained multiple gunshot wounds to both legs during an encounter with police.

900623:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.
900623:  Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board.
900707:  Counseled for deficiencies in performance and conduct. Unauthorized absence from place of duty on 900707.] Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary warning issued.

900711:  Charges imposed to special court-martial for violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Article 86: Absent from his unit, to wit: 0730, 900406 to 1920, 900409 (3 days). Article 90: Willfully disobey Chief Warrant Officer 4’s lawful order on 900405, to wit: not to go to wife’s apartment. Article 91: Willfully disobey Sergeant Major’s lawful order on 900405, to wit: not go to wife’s apartment. Unsigned.
900720:  Applicant’s hearing scheduled at Norfolk General District Court.

 900720:  Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. By this letter you are notified of two additional serious offenses that will form the bases of my recommendation. Additionally, the there offenses listed in paragraph 2 of reference (a) are restated and clarified.
900806:  An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had committed misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense, that the misconduct warranted separation, and recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions.

900808:  Commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense. The factual basis for this recommendation was the felonies you committed on 900405.

900824:  SJA review determined the case sufficient in law and fact.

900827:  GCMCA [Commanding General, 4 th Marine Aircraft Wing, FMF] directed the Applicant's discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.

PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW

Discussion

The Applicant was discharged on 19900905 under other than honorable conditions for misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense (A). The Board presumed regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs (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 equitable (C and D).

Issue 1. The NDRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the character of service and/or the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. There is no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the Applicant’s discharge. The Applicant’s misconduct is clearly documented. Therefore, relief is denied.

Issues 2-4. Concerning six months Corporal pay, 126 days leave and awarding a good conduct medal, the NDRB has no authority to affect any changes. The Applicant is advised to petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) at the following address for possible relief regarding Issues 2-4:

Board for Correction of Naval Records
2 Navy Annex
Washington, DC 20370-5100

The Applicant remains eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided an application is received, at the NDRB, within 15 years from the date of discharge. The Applicant can provide documentation to support any claims of post-service accomplishments or any other evidence related to his discharge at that time. Representation at a personal appearance hearing is recommended but not required.

Pertinent Regulation/Law (at time of discharge)

 A. Paragraph 6210, Misconduct The Marine Corps Separation and Retirement Manual, ( MCO P1900.16D), effective 27 Jun 89 until 17 Aug 95.

B. 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.

C. 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.

D. 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 | 2002_Marine | MD02-00239

    Original file (MD02-00239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00239 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 020114, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to honorable. 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) 970213 - 970622 COG Period of Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00123

    Original file (MD02-00123.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge shall change to: UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL)/ SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY, authority: MARCORSEPMAN Par. The issue that I am submitting to the Discharge Review Board is that my discharge is improper. I base this on the fact that during my time in the Marine Corps, I did my duty and served with honor.

  • USMC | DRB | 1999_Marine | MD99-00489

    Original file (MD99-00489.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This can not be called a repeated offense of theft, because my civil court concluded on 970528 that it was two counts of possession and not felonious larceny as stated on my discharge paperwork. Supervised probation for 18 months.970711: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by conviction on July 2, 1997 by the State of North Carolina for two charges of...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501386

    Original file (MD0501386.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions). Commanding Officer’s comments: “Lance Corporal J_(Applicant) was convicted on 13 August 2002 on felony charges of drug possession and sentenced to pay a $500.00 fine and serve 1 year on probation. The Applicant’s service was marred by nonjudicial punishment proceedings for violation of Article 112a (wrongful use, possession of controlled...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-01240

    Original file (MD02-01240.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was discharged and I was still in. 000920: Applicant’s Base driving privileges reinstated.010604: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense as evidenced by pending civil trial for statutory rape and forcible rape of an intoxicated person, both felony charges.010605: Applicant’s civilian lawyer (M_ L_) advised command that he was representing Applicant on a criminal...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-01334

    Original file (ND03-01334.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. No indication of appeal in the record.980115: Applicant notified of intended recommendation for discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to the commission of a serious offense.980115: Applicant advised of rights and having consulted with counsel certified under UCMJ Article 27B, elected to appear before an Administrative Discharge Board. ...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500518

    Original file (MD0500518.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Due to that felony charge I, I was discharged by the Marine Corps 8 months later. The Veterans Administration determines eligibility for post-service benefits not the Naval Discharge Review Board.

  • USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-01461

    Original file (MD03-01461.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    My discharge was inequitable because the conduct upon which it is based has been mitigated by overall good service and a demonstration that the alleged conduct was fabricated and untrue.2. G_ (Applicant) requests a discharge upgrade because the General Discharge is based only on alleged conduct that is mitigated by overall good service. G_ (Applicant)’s.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2004 Marine | MD04-00862

    Original file (MD04-00862.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). 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. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00470

    Original file (MD02-00470.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD02-00470 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’s service was marred by a civil conviction for driving under the combined influence of alcohol and a drug, and inflicting bodily injury on another person. You should read Enclosure (5) of the Directive before submitting such a complaint.