MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           9 November 1999                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999026000

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Member	
	Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his bad conduct discharge be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he had ineffective representation, he was denied a speedy trial, and it has been almost 25 years since his court-martial.  No supporting evidence is provided.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 August 1974.  

Between January and July 1975, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on four occasions for disobeying a lawful order; sleeping on his post; being disrespectful in language towards a non-commissioned officer; and absenting himself from his appointed place of duty and carelessly discharging a shotgun, respectively.

On 21 October 1975, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of assault, communication of a threat, and two specifications of breach of restriction.  He was sentenced to forfeit $200.00 pay for 12 months, to be confined at hard labor for 12 months, and to be discharged with a bad conduct discharge.

On 29 August 1977, the U. S. Army Court of Military Review reviewed the applicant’s case particularly regarding whether he had a speedy trial and whether he was denied due process of law.  After considering these issues, the Court of Military Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.

On 14 March 1979, the applicant was discharged, with a bad conduct discharge, pursuant to his court-martial conviction.  He had completed 3 years, 7 months and 4 days of creditable active service and had 366 days time lost (confinement).

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

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

__rvo___  __cla___  __kyf___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026000	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19991109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	105.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.