APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his dishonorable discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was convicted on hearsay, the sentence was extremely cruel and inhumane, that it was punishment from his superiors for stating that he wanted to marry a German lady.  He feels this was a racially motivated frame up.  The Memorandums of Consideration are not available and the case is reviewed de novo.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant’s military records show:

He was born on 19 November 1928.  He completed 12 years of formal education.  He was inducted into the Army on 30 January 1951.

On 4 September 1953, the applicant was convicted by a general-court martial of assault, wherein grievous bodily harm was intentionally inflicted.  He was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances and to confinement at hard labor for 5 years.

On 10 November 1953, the U.S. Army Board of Review affirmed the sentence.

On 26 April 1954, the sentence was ordered to be duly executed.

On 29 May 1955, clemency was disapproved but parole was approved.

Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, as amended, precludes any action by this Board which would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  Trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offense charged.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

3.  There is no evidence in the available records or in the applicant’s supporting documentation to demonstrate that he was the victim of racial prejudice.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

                             				 Loren G. Harrell
					 	Director