MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            29 March 2001                  
DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000043601

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Joyce A. Hall		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		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 dishonorable discharge (DD) be upgraded to an honorable discharge.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he be granted an honorable discharge because he was an honorable soldier.  The Army duped him into accepting a 
DD that he did not deserve.  He does not have any support because the people that were involved are not in his state or city or may be deceased by now.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records may have been lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Information herein was taken from trial by court martial and from reconstructed personnel records.

The available record shows that on 11 April 1951, the applicant entered the Army under the name of J---- T----.  

While the applicant was assigned to the 7th Armed Division, Camp Roberts, CA. he was convicted by a summary court-martial (SCM) of being absent without leave (AWOL) from 6 to 11 June 1951.  He was sentenced to 15 days hard labor and a forfeiture of $50.00 pay.  The available information also shows that he was convicted by a special court-martial (SPCM) of two specifications of being AWOL from 7 to 13 September 1951 and from 25 September to 11 October 1951.  He was sentenced to 30 days hard labor.  

On 13 February 1953, the applicant was convicted by a SPCM of breaking house arrest. He was sentenced to 90 days confinement at hard labor (CHL) and a forfeiture of $25.00 pay per month for 3 months.

On 8 September 1953, the applicant was convicted by a SCM of being AWOL 
from 18 to 27 August 1953.  He was sentenced to 30 days hard labor without confinement and a forfeiture of $28.00 pay.

On 24 September 1953, the applicant was convicted by a SPCM of assault on a fellow enlisted person, striking at him with a means likely to produce grievous bodily harm, to wit; a knife.  He was sentenced to 6 months CHL and a forfeiture of $28.00 pay per month for 6 months.

On 22 December 1953, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial of 
conspiracy to escape from confinement and attempt to escape from lawful confinement.  He was sentenced to CHL for 2 years, a forfeiture of all pay and allowances and to be discharged for service with a DD.

On 5 January 1954, the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as provides for dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and CHL for 1 year.

On 3 March 1954, the Board of Review of the United States Army in the Office of the Judge Advocate General affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.  The applicant’s record does not indicate that he petitioned the United States Court of Military Appeals for a grant of review.

The record available shows that on 30 October 1954, the applicant was released from confinement and discharged with a DD.

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

Army Regulation 635-5 prescribes the separation documents prepared for soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  In pertinent part it states that the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active Army service at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge.

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 this 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 has submitted neither probative evidence nor convincing argument in support of the request.

4.  The applicant has failed to provide any basis for the Board to grant clemency in his case.

5.  The applicant’s court-martial records and the records available to the Board shows that he entered and served under the name J---- T---- and was discharged under the same name.  Therefore, the Board finds no basis for compromising the integrity of the Army’s records.

6.  For historical purposes, the Army has an interest in maintaining the accuracy of its records.  The data and information contained in those records should

7.  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

__jns___  __le____  __cjp___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043601	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010329	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	DD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19541030	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.0300	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.