TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Christopher S. Buckley

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Christopher S. BUCKLEY, Appellant

United States v. Buckley, 451 F.2d 594 (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
December 30, 1971
Docket
No. 71-1964
Judges
Browning, Kilkenny, Curtis
Citations
451 F.2d 594

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted in a jury trial of violating 50 U.S. C. App. § 462 [refusing to submit to induction into the Armed Forces]. We affirm.

(1) First, appellant contends that his denial of conscientious objector status by the local board was based upon findings which were subject to different interpretations and that the board did not specify on what basis his request was denied. We disagree. A careful examination of the record convinces us that there was a basis in fact for the local board’s finding, and although the minutes of the board are not a prototype to be admired and duplicated, they are sufficiently clear to support the ultimate decision of insincerity. The findings here meet the test required in United States v. Kember, 437 F.2d 534 (9th Cir. 1970), cert. denied 402 U.S. 923 , 91 S.Ct. 1392 , 28 L.Ed.2d 662 (1971), and authorities therein cited.

(2) Inasmuch as we have just held that there was a basis in fact for the local board’s finding of insincerity, appellant’s contention that the appeal board was required to state reasons for denying appellant’s claim is clearly without merit. In affirming, without stating reasons, the appeal board by implication adopted the local board’s rationale. Notwithstanding appellant’s vigorous argument to the contrary, the local board gave only one basic reason for its denial, i. e. insincerity. Consequently, United States v. French, 429 F.2d 391 (9th Cir. 1970), has no application. Where, as here, the reason can be determined from the agency record with reasonable certainty, the appeal board is not required to restate it. United States v. Kember, supra.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1972: 11974: 119722026peak 1972 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Windsor351 F. Supp. 215 (M.D. Fla. 1972)
  2. United States v. Mark Randall Windsor488 F.2d 1364 (5th Cir. 1974)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Mark Randall Windsor488 F.2d 1364 (5th Cir. 1974)
  2. United States v. Windsor351 F. Supp. 215 (M.D. Fla. 1972)

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 2

DepthCaseCited by
United States v. Kember, 437 F.2d 534 (9th Cir. 1971) 27
United States v. French, 429 F.2d 391 (9th Cir. 1970) 17

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