MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

		IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE:           9 October 2003     
		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003086584

	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. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert J. Osborn		Member	
	Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast		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 be upgraded.

APPLICANT STATES:  That it has been 54 years since he was discharged.  He is 73 years old.  There is no error or injustice; however, it was a crime committed by a foolish 19-year old.  For the past 60 years he has tried to be a model citizen. Many in his family know nothing of his discharge.  He feels it is time for it to be corrected.  He provides no supporting evidence.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were presumably lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  Information contained herein was obtained from his report of trial.  His separation document is not available.

The applicant was born on 25 January 1930.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 August 1948 for 1 year.

On or about 31 March 1949, the applicant and another soldier robbed another soldier who was performing his duties as a sentry.  On or about 1 April 1949, the applicant made a voluntary statement to investigators that "they" waited for the guard behind the barracks.  When the guard turned the corner "they" followed him.  The applicant jumped the guard, hit the guard in the face and, when the guard fell down, kicked the guard in the stomach 3 times.  After the guard "passed out," the applicant put his hand in the guard's pocket, took his wallet, and ran away.  

On 19 May 1949, in a joint trial, the applicant was convicted by a general court- martial of robbery under the 93d Article of War (by stealing, by force and violence and by putting him in fear, about $53.00 from another soldier).  The applicant's adjudged punishment was to be sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, to forfeit all pay and allowances, and to be confined at hard labor for 5 years.  (The other soldier was sentenced to the same punishment except his confinement was to be for 4 years.)

The convening authority approved the sentence but reduced the period of confinement with respect to each sentence to 3 years.

On 29 June 1949, the U.S. Army Board of Review affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.

Army Regulation 635-200 governs the separation of enlisted personnel.  In pertinent part, it states that an honorable discharge is a separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when the quality of the soldier’s service generally has met the standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate.  A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions.  It is issued to a soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable 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 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 Board concludes the applicant has provided insufficient justification on which to base an upgrade of his discharge.

3.  If the applicant desires to consider applying for a Presidential Pardon, he may write directly to the Pardon Attorney, 4th Floor, 500 First Street, NW, Washington, DC 20530.

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___  __rjo___  __ecp___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003086584	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20031009	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Mr. Schneider	
ISSUES         1.	105.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.