MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           5 September 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002068624

	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	
	Mr. G. E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 (BCD) be upgraded to general under honorable conditions.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the characterization of his discharge is too severe for the infraction cited in his general court-martial.  He states that he was in serious debt at the time he was to be released from service.  He justifies his actions by stating that he was being threatened to pay back the money he owed so when his friend refused to loan him the money he needed, he stole a bag that contained drugs and money thinking that it would not be reported.  He avers that when he was arrested, the military police threw away the drugs.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 18 November 1971.  Upon completion of training as a medical corpsman he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, 3rd Battalion, 17th Artillery Regiment in Germany.  

The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), five times for being absent from his place of duty on eight occasions.

On 24 January 1974, the applicant was tried by a general court-martial for robbery of four soldiers, four separate specifications of violation of Article 122, UCMJ, (robbery from the person of another by means of force with fear of injury). He plead guilty to all four specifications and was sentenced to be reduced to pay grade E-1, confinement at hard labor for 36 months, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a dishonorable discharge.

On 27 May 1974, the convening authority approved the sentence, but reduced the period of confinement to 1 year and the discharge to a bad conduct discharge.

The findings and sentence were affirmed upon review and the Court of Military Appeals denied the appeal to hear the case.  The Secretary of the Army reduced the sentenced confinement to 10 months, on 29 August 1974, and the BCD was ordered executed on 3 May 1975.

The applicant was discharged on 19 May 1975.  He received a Bad Conduct Discharge Certificate with a characterization of service of under conditions other than honorable.  He had 2 years, 7 months, and 1 day of creditable service with a total of 335 days lost due to confinement. 

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.  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.

2.  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 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.

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

__CLA __  ___MHM_  __JTM __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002068624	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020905	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	A68.03	
2.	105.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.