APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his dishonorable discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was severely punished in light of his prison sentence and that to suffer further by way of the defamation of his character is tantamount to cruel and unusual punishment.  His judge had a reputation for extremely harsh punishment for individuals involved in alcohol or drug-related offenses.  Another individual involved in the same offense, who had a different judge, received a much more appropriate sentence.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 October 1985.  The highest grade he held was Sergeant, E-5.

The applicant has no record of any disciplinary actions prior to the incident that resulted in his court-martial.  His awards and decorations included the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Army Achievement Medal (2d Oak Leaf Cluster) and the Army Commendation Medal.

On 8 June 1992, the applicant pleaded guilty to and was convicted by a general court-martial of stealing property of a value of about $3,100 and of unlawfully entering a storage room with intent to commit larceny.  He was sentenced to be reduced to pay grade E-1, to be confined for 4 years and to be dishonorably discharged.

On 10 March 1993, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review affirmed the sentence.

On 29 November 1993, the applicant was placed on parole.

On 7 January 1994, the applicant was discharged with a dishonorable discharge, pursuant to his court-martial sentence.  He had completed 6 years, 7 months and 13 days of creditable active service and had 250 days of lost time (confinement time) plus 269 days subsequent to his normal expiration term of service.

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.  The applicant’s contentions relate to evidentiary and procedural matters which were finally and conclusively adjudicated in the court-martial appellate process and furnish no basis for recharacterization of the discharge.

3.  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