MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           20 February 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002077104

	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	
	Ms. Antoinette Farley		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		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.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that it has been over 20 years and he hopes that he can be helped with getting his DD upgraded.  

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years on 13 February 1979.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 57E (Laundry and Bath Specialist).  Upon completion of his training he was assigned to Germany for duty on 25 May 1979.  He had been promoted to pay grade E-4 effective 1 June 1980.

On 21 October 1981, the applicant was convicted by a general court-martial 
of one specification for aggravated assault by intentionally inflicting grievous bodily harm with a knife and a second specification for robbery on 8 June 1981.  He was sentenced to be reduced to pay grade E-1, to forfeit all pay and allowances, to be confined for a period of 5 years at hard labor, and to be discharged with a dishonorable discharge.  On 23 August 1981, the applicant was transferred to the United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas for confinement.  On 17 December 1981, the convening authority approved the sentence.

On 13 August 1982, the U.S. Army Court of Military Review affirmed the findings and sentence.  

On 25 August 1982, the applicant petitioned the U. S. Court of Military Appeals for a review of his conviction, which was denied on 23 September 1983.  The U.S. Court of Military Appeals affirmed the decision of the Army Court of Military Review.  On 7 October 1983, General Court Martial Order Number 677, United States Disciplinary Barracks, US Army Combined Arms Center, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, ordered the DD to be duly executed.

On 14 October 1983, the applicant was discharged, with a DD.  He had completed 2 years, 8 months and 8 days of active military service and had 724 days of lost time from 21 October 1981 to 14 October 1983 due to confinement.  

The statutory authority under which this Board was created (Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552) precludes any action by this Board, which would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.  The sentence may be modified by the Board based upon a finding of clemency.

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.

2.  The applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of his service was not consistent with the Army’s standards for acceptable conduct and performance of duty by military personnel.  The applicant has provided no evidence demonstrating his overall record of service mitigated his unacceptable conduct.

3.  Conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge appropriately characterized the misconduct for which the applicant was convicted.

4.  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.

5.  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

___JL  __  __LE  ___  ___ALR _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077104	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/02/20	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	DD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1983/10/14	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	105.01	
2.	110.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.