TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Walter Jon Pinkus v. Willard C. Pearson, Commanding General of Fort Lewis and Stanley Resor, Secretary of the Army

Walter Jon PINKUS, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Willard C. PEARSON, Commanding General of Fort Lewis; And Stanley Resor, Secretary of the Army, Respondents-Appellees

Pinkus v. Pearson, 449 F.2d 162 (9th Cir. 1971)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
September 23, 1971
Docket
No. 71-1105
Judges
Duniway, Choy, Solomon
Citations
449 F.2d 162

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Pinkus appeals from denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus, in which he sought discharge from the Armed Forces as a conscientious objector. He has exhausted his administrative remedies.

1. Pinkus’ beliefs, as stated by him, clearly bring his case within the rationale of Welsh v. United States, 1970, 398 U.S. 333 , 90 S.Ct. 1792 , 26 L.Ed.2d 308 . While erroneous views as to the nature of Pinkus’ beliefs were relied on at some stages of the Army’s review of Pinkus’ application for discharge, the Conscientious Objector Review Board relied solely on its conclusion that Pinkus was not sincere.

2. There must be a basis in fact for a finding of insincerity when the applicant’s stated views bring him within the statutory exemption. Here, we can find none. The Board based its decision on a single incident described by Pinkus which, according to the Board, showed that “he is willing to use violence against his fellow man.” It shows no such thing; what it does show is that, in spite of strong anger at some fellow soldiers, he restrained the impulse toward violence that he felt. We note that those persons who personally interviewed Pinkus found him to be sincere in his beliefs.

The order is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court with instructions to issue the writ, unless within 30 days the Army grants Pinkus a discharge as a conscientious objector. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1974: 119742026peak 1974 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. John Dean Wallace, Jr. v. James Schlesinger, as Secretary of Defense500 F.2d 117 (9th Cir. 1974)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970) 632

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list