Application Receipt Date: 070209 Prior Review Prior Review Date: 040310 I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293 and supporting documents. II. Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed? Yes No Tender Offer: ????? See Attachments: Legal Medical Minority Opinion Exhibits III. Original Character of Discharge Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: Date: NIF Discharge Received: Date: 030606 Chapter: 10 AR: 635-200 Reason: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial RE: SPD: KFS Unit/Location: 17th Military Police Detachment, Fort Jackson, SC Time Lost: None Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: Current ENL Date: 001010 Current ENL Term: 03 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 02 Yrs, 07Mos, 27Days ????? Total Service: 07 Yrs, 03Mos, 08Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNG-960229-960715/NA ADT-960716-961206/HD ARNG-961207-970319/NA RA-970320-990321/HD RA-990322-001009/HD Highest Grade: E5 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 95B10 (Military Police) GT: 105 EDU: 1 yr Coll Overseas: Korea Combat: None Decorations/Awards: AAM (3d Award), Air Force Achievement Medal, AGCM, NDSM (2d Award), NCOPDR, ASR, OSR (2d Award) V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: Applicant states he is currently employed by the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice where he serves as a Juvenile Justice Detention Officer II, with an additional duty of Gang Intelligence Officer. VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: The evidence of record shows that on 6 May 2003, the applicant was charged with unlawfully striking a child under the age of 16 years on the buttocks and legs with a belt 12 March 2003 and maltreating a female Soldier, a person subject to his orders, by having sex with her 30 March 2003. On 14 May 2003, the applicant consulted with legal counsel and voluntarily requested, in writing, discharge under the provisions of Chapter 10, AR 635-200 in lieu of trial by court-martial. In this request, the applicant admitted guilt to the offense, or a lesser included offense. Further, the applicant indicated that he understood that he could receive an under other than honorable conditions discharge and that the discharge would have a significant effect on eligibility for veteran’s benefits. The applicant did not submit a statement in his own behalf. The separation authority approved the discharge with an under other than honorable conditions discharge. The applicant was to be reduced to the rank of private/E1. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for a discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. Army policy states that although an honorable or general discharge is authorized, a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the independent evidence he submitted, the analyst found several mitigating factors that would warrant an upgrade of the characterization of service to general, under honorable conditions. This recommendation was made after full consideration of his faithful and honorable service, as well as his record of misconduct. The evidence in this case supports a conclusion that the applicant’s characterization of service was too harsh, and as a result it is inequitable. The analyst determined that the overall length and quality of the applicant's service and the circumstances surrounding the discharge, mitigated the discrediting entries in his service record. However, the reason for discharge was both proper and equitable. This action entails a restoration of grade to sergeant/E5. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 15 May 2007 Location: Tampa, FL Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: none Witnesses/Observers: NA Exhibits Submitted: NA VIII. Board Decision The discharge was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The characterization of service was: Proper Improper Equitable Inequitable The narrative reasons were: Equitable Inequitable DRB voting record: Change No change (Character) Change No change (Reason) (Board member names available upon request) IX. Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation The Board found the discharge was proper and equitable and voted not to change it. Case report reviewed and verified by: Eric S. Moore, Examiner X. Board Action Directed No Change Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: ????? Other: ????? RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: ????? XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 18 May 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20070002054 Applicant Name: Mr. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 3 of 4 pages