IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 August 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140013366 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests upgrade of his bad conduct discharge (BCD). 2. The applicant states he is trying to redeem himself in the U.S. Army’s eyes. He has learned from his mistakes. He does not disagree with the present discharge. He admits, “I did what I did.” He truly regrets it, but he can’t change the past. All he can do is grow from the experience. He apologizes but he has no rehearsed excuses. He is asking for some help. His life has not been the same since the military, moving from home to home, behind on bills. He has a wife and 6 kids. He is one of many who have fallen and gotten back up. He had great military service before his ?mishap.? 3. The applicant states he is submitting ?some character letters from a few people?; however there is no record of any having been received. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted on 1 August 1996 and completed training as an infantryman in military occupational specialty (MOS 11B. 3. His iPERMS (Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System) record contains documents showing he: * completed the Primary Leadership Development Course * was promoted to sergeant (pay grade E-5) on 2 February 2001 * received a single noncommissioned officer (NCO) evaluation report (for the period ending July 2001) showing – * the rater marked him as successful in all areas except physical fitness and military bearing where he was rated as excellent * the rater marked him as fully capable * the senior rater marked him in the second block for overall performance and in the first block for overall potential * was awarded the Parachutist Badge in December 1996 and the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period ending 31 July 1999 4. On 28 May 2002, a general court-martial found him guilty, in accordance with his pleas, of writing worthless checks to the Finance Disbursing Office, Vicenza, Italy. (Two specifications: six checks in July 2001 totaling $2,600.00 and eleven checks in August 2001 totaling $5889.72.) He was also found guilty, in accordance with his plea, of using marijuana in January 2001. 5. The adjudged sentence included reduction to pay grade E-1, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, confinement for 10 months and a bad conduct discharge. The General Court-Martial Convening Authority approved the sentence but reduced confinement to 7 months. Except for the BCD which was pending appellate review, the sentence was ordered executed. 6. On 6 June 2003, Article 71(c) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice having been complied with, the BCD was ordered executed. 7. The applicant was discharged on 21 August 2003. 8. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. In accordance with Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, the authority under which this Board acts, the ABCMR is not empowered to set aside a conviction. Rather it is only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process and then only if clemency is determined to be appropriate. Clemency is an act of mercy, or instance of leniency, to moderate the severity of the punishment imposed. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s trial by court-martial was warranted by the gravity of the offenses charged.  His conviction and discharge were effected in accordance with applicable law and regulations, and the discharge he received appropriately characterizes the misconduct for which he was convicted. 2. Notwithstanding what appears to have been a period of successful service prior to his misconduct, the depth of his remorse, and the difficulty of his current situation, considering the gravity of the offenses for which he was convicted there is an insufficient basis for granting clemency in this case. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x___ ____x____ ___x____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. ___________x____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140013366 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140013366 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1