Application Receipt Date: 060616 Prior Review Prior Review Date: None I. Applicant Request Request: Upgrade Reason Change RE Code Change Issues: See applicant's attached DD Form 293. 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: 030501 Discharge Received: Date: 040505 Chapter: 3 AR: 635-200 Reason: Court-Martial, Other RE: SPD: JJD Unit/Location: A Battery, Personnel and Support Battalion, US Army Field Artillery Center and Fort Sill, Fort Sill OK Time Lost: Confined by military authorities for a total of 115 days from 030501-030823, as a result of his Special Court-Martial 030501. Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None Court-Martials (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030501/Special Court-Martial/Between on or about 020301 and on or about 020731 for stealing a checkbook of some value the property of another Soldier, between on or about 020827 and on or about 020923 for stealing deposit funds of value of $2,250 the property of another Soldier and between on or about 020827 and on or about 020923 with the intend to defraud, falsely made the signature of another Soldier to certain checks in the amount of $200.00, $250.00, $250.00, $300.00, $350.00, $400.00, and $500.00 for a total of $2,250.00 which such checks would if genuine, apparently operate to the legal harm of another Soldier. She was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, forfeiture of $767.00 pay per month for six months, confinement for six months, and reduction to E1. Counseling Records Available: Yes No IV. Soldier’s Overall Record DOB: 810717 Current ENL Date: 020227 Current ENL Term: 03 Years ????? Current ENL Service: 01 Yrs, 10Mos, 14Days ????? Total Service: 03 Yrs, 03Mos, 14Days ????? Previous Discharges: ARNG-000927-010326/NA ADT-010327-010816/UNC ARNG-010817-020226/HD Highest Grade: E3 Performance Ratings Available: Yes No MOS: 42A10 (Personnel Service Specialist) GT: 78 EDU: HS Grad Overseas: None Combat: None Decorations/Awards: NDSM (2d Award), ASR V. Post-Discharge Activity Home of Record: Current Address: Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed VI. Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation a. Facts and Circumstances: Evidence of record shows that on 1 May 2003, the applicant was found guilty pursuant to her pleas by a special court-martial of between on or about 1 March 2002 and on or about 31 July 2002 stealing a checkbook of some value the property of another Soldier; between on or about 27 August 2002 and on or about 23 September 2002 stealing deposit funds of value of $2,250 the property of another Soldier; and between on or about 27 August 2002 and on or about 23 September 2002, with the intent to defraud by forging checks of another Solder in the amounts of $200.00, $250.00, $250.00, $300.00, $350.00, $400.00, and $500.00 for a total of $2,250.00. She was sentenced to be discharged with a Bad Conduct Discharge, forfeiture of $767.00 pay per month for six months, confinement for six months, and reduction to E1. On 7 August 2003, only so much of the sentence as provided for reduction to the grade of private E1, forfeiture of $767.00 pay per month for six months, confinement for 4 months and 15 days, and discharge from the service with a bad-conduct discharge was approved. Except for the part of the sentence extending to a bad-conduct discharge, the sentence was ordered to be executed. The record of trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of The Army for review by the Army Court of Criminal Appeals. On 30 September 2003, the court affirmed the findings of gulity and the sentence. On 5 January 2004, the sentence having been affirmed pursuant to Article 71c having been complied with, the bad-conduct discharge was ordered to be executed and that part of the sentence extending to confinement has been served. b. Legal Basis for Separation: Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 3, Section IV, establishes policy and procedures for separating members with a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge; and provides that a soldier will be given a bad conduct discharge pursuant only to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial; and that the appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. c. Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale: After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue she submitted, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would warrant clemency. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was adjudged guilty by court-martial and that the sentence was approved by the convening authority. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. The Army Discharge Review Board is empowered to change the discharge 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. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record, the analyst found no cause to recommend clemency and therefore, the reason for discharge and the characterization of service remains both proper and equitable. VII. Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing Type of Hearing: Date: 23 May 2007 Location: Washington, DC Did the Applicant Testify? Yes No Counsel: NA 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 After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the analyst’s recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both 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: NA Other: NA RE Code: Grade Restoration: No Yes Grade: NA XI. Certification Signature and Date Approval Authority: MARK E. COLLINS Colonel, U.S. Army President, Army Discharge Review Board Official: MARY E. SHAW DATE: 31 May 2007 Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army Chief, Secretary Recorder ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE Case Number AR20060008896 Applicant Name: Ms. ______________________________________________________________________ Page 5 of 5 pages