Search Decisions

Decision Text

USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600902
Original file (MD0600902.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied


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


FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY


ex-Pvt, USMC
Docket No. MD
06-00902

Applicant’s Request

The application for discharge review was received on 20060616 . The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable . The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. The Applicant did not designate a representative on the DD Form 293.

Decision

A documentary discharge review was conducted in Washington, D.C. on 2007 0419 . After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the characterization of discharge was appropriate. The Board’s vote was unanimous that the character of the discharge shall not change. The discharge shall remain as a bad conduct discharge by reason of court-marital.



PART I - ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION

Decisional Issues

Equity: The Applicant is claiming his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 43.5 months of service.
Documentation

In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:

Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Service 2)


PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE

Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge):

         Inactive: USMCR (DEP)    19970115 - 19970210       COG
         Active: None

Period of Service Under Review :

Date of Enlistment: 19970211              Date of Discharge: 20001207

Length of Service (years, months, days):

Active: 0 3 0 9 26 (Does not exclude lost time.)
         Inactive: None

Time Lost During This Period (days):

         Unauthorized absence: None
         Confinement:             
72 day s

Age at Entry: 1 9

Years Contracted: 4

Education Level: 12                                 AFQT: 78

Highest Rank: LCpl                                   MOS: 3043

Final Enlisted Performance Evaluation Averages (number of marks):

Proficiency: 4 . 5 ( 3 )                        Conduct: 4 . 4 ( 3 )

Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, (as stated on the DD Form 214): Rifle Sharpshooter Badge



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 :

981120 :  Special Court Martial [trial dates 981030 - 981120 ]
         Charge I: violation of the UCMJ, Article 107 .
         Specification: On or about 980513 with intent to deceive, make to Special Agent P_ M. M_, an official statement, which statement was totally false and was then known by the said LCpl K_ to be so false. Plea : Guilty. Findings : Guilty.
         Charge II: violation of the U CM J, Article 134 .
         Specification: At or near Marine Corps Barracks 2001, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia, on or about 985013, commit an indecent assault upon PFC S_ M. C_, a person not his wife, by fondling the said PFC C_’s genital area, with intent to gratify his lust and sexual desire. Plea : Guilty. Findings : Guilty.
         Sentence: Confinement for 6 months, reduction to E-1, Bad Conduct discharge.
         CA
991022 : T he sentence is approved , and ex cept for the bad conduct discharge , will be executed, but the execution of that part of the sentence extending to confinement in excess of 90 days, will be suspended for a period of 12 months form the date of trial

981120 :  Joined Brig, Marine Corps Base, Quantico, Virginia , for confinement.

990201 :  From confinement, restored to full duty.

000726 :  NMCCCA: Affirmed findings and sentence.

001127 :  Appellate review complete.

001207 :  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 20001207 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). After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the Applicant’s issues were insufficient to merit clemency (C).

The Applicant is claiming his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident in 43.5 months of service. In response to the Applicant’s issue, relevant and material facts stated in a court-martial specification are presumed by the NDRB to be established facts. With respect to a discharge adjudged by a court-martial case, the action of the NDRB is restricted to upgrades based on clemency. Clemency is an act of leniency that reduces the severity of the punishment imposed. After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and issue 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. Relief denied.

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 evidence of record did not contain sufficient mitigating or extenuating factors to offset the seriousness of the offenses for which the discharge was awarded. In addition, the reason for discharge, convicted by special court-martial, is most appropriate. Relief denied.

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 additional evidence related to this 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 010831.

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 134 (Indecent acts with another).

C.
Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 205(2), Jurisdictional Limitations Authority for Review of Discharges.

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 Instruction 1332.28, you may submit a complaint in accordance with Enclosure (5) of that Instruction . You should read Enclosure (5) of the Instruction 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 Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at http://Boards.law.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:

                  Secretary of the Navy    Council of Review Boards
                  Attn: Naval Discharge Review Board
                  720 Kennon Street SE Rm 309
                  Washington Navy Yard DC 20374-5023



Similar Decisions

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600945

    Original file (MD0600945.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD06-00945 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20060706. Equity – Minor offenses, substance abuse did not involve distribution Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant, was considered:Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 1)Applicant’s DD Form 214 (Member 4) Applicant’s DD Form 214 (State Director of Veterans Affairs)Letter from Applicant PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500762

    Original file (MD0500762.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable and that the narrative reason for separation be changed to: “RE code.” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. My problems had to do with my off duty time. The applicant did not provide additional documentation for the Board’s consideration PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Active:...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501193

    Original file (MD0501193.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION The way the record reads it gives the appearance that the Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) that brought forth the allegations and specifications may have been experiencing and personality conflict with the applicant and instead of more direct counseling to resolve the issues took another approach to bring forward any charge that could be thought of to mitigate a discharge for the applicant, thereby not having to deal with the events of the past...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600433

    Original file (MD0600433.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant chose not to make a statement.960510: Acknowledged understanding of eligibility but not recommended for promotion to LCpl for the month of April because of your recent NJP.Applicant chose not to make a statement.970106: Applicant to unauthorized absence at 0715 on 970106.970115: Applicant from unauthorized absence at 0715 on 970115 (9 days).970220: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 86: In that LCpl H_(Applicant), did, on board MCB Camp P Pendleton, CA on or about 0715, 970106,...

  • USMC | DRB | 2010_Marine | MD1000085

    Original file (MD1000085.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, the Naval Clemency and Parole Board reviewed the case and determined that no clemency was warranted. The NDRB conducted a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s Summary of Service, Service Record entries, the transcript of the Special Court-Martial proceeding, and the overall discharge process. ” Additional Reviews : After a document review has been conducted, former members are eligible for a personal appearance hearing, provided the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600022

    Original file (MD0600022.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues, as stated Applicant’s issues, as stated on the application:“Request upgrade of DD Form 214 discharge, “Character of Service”” After a thorough review of the Applicant’s record and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency is not warranted. 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 112A Wrongful use, possession, etc.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2006_Navy | ND0600707

    Original file (ND0600707.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant’s service was marred nonjudicial punishment proceedings on 20011114 and a special court-martial conviction on 20030812 for violations of UCMJ Article 92 Failure to obey order or regulation (2 specifications); Article 120 Carnal knowledge; and Article 134 Indecent act (2 specifications). After a thorough review of the Applicant’s records and issues submitted, the Board determined that clemency was not warranted and that the sentence awarded the Applicant at his court-martial...

  • USMC | DRB | 2002_Marine | MD02-00033

    Original file (MD02-00033.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Equity Issue) Pursuant to 10 USC 874 (b) (UCMJ, Article 74) and in accordance with SECNAVINST 5420.174C, enclosure (1), paragraph 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. PART III – RATIONALE FOR DECISION AND PERTINENT REGULATION/LAW Discussion The applicant was discharged on 970723 with a bad conduct discharge which was the sentence adjudged...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600356

    Original file (MD0600356.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). PART I - APPLICANT’S ISSUES AND DOCUMENTATION You may view DoD Directive 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “ http://Boards.law.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:Secretary of the...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600504

    Original file (MD0600504.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. D. Secretary of the Navy Instruction 5420.174D of 22 December 2004, Naval Discharge Review Board (NDRB) Procedures and Standards, Part II, Para 211, Regularity of Government Affairs. You may view DoD Instruction 1332.28 and other Decisional Documents by going online at “...