United States of America, Fppellee v. John Douglas Hedges

441 F.2d 726, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10301
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMay 10, 1971
Docket19753
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 441 F.2d 726 (United States of America, Fppellee v. John Douglas Hedges) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States of America, Fppellee v. John Douglas Hedges, 441 F.2d 726, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10301 (8th Cir. 1971).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On March 24, 1969, 297 F.Supp. 946, the defendant was convicted of failing to comply with an order of his local selective service board to report for and submit to induction into the armed forces of the United States. Timely appeal was filed. It is urged on appeal, inter alia, that the local draft board failed to afford the defendant due process in refusing to reopen his I-A classification after the defendant had received his induction order. Defendant asserts that he filed as a conscientious objector after he had received his order to report. Defendant claims that this constitutes “a change in the registrant’s status resulting from circumstances over which the registrant has no control.” 32 C.F.R. § 1625.2. Defendant’s challenge cannot be sustained. This case is controlled by the *727 recent decision in Ehlert v. United States, 402 U.S. 99, 91 S.Ct. 1319, 28 L.Ed.2d 625 (1971), which upholds the right of a local board to refuse to consider a late claim (after induction notice is received) for classification as a conscientious objector. We have considered the other alleged procedural irregularities in the induction process and find no prejudicial error.

Judgment affirmed. 1

1

. Defendant’s late application prevented the Selective Service officials from processing his claim for exemption. Since it is now clear under Ehlert, supra, that Army regulations will be construed to allow the processing of a conscientious objector claim after induction, the district court may desire to consider, upon appropriate motion, a review of the sentence for the purpose of determining whether in the interest of justice the defendant should be placed on probation in order to afford him an opportunity to make arrangements to be inducted into the Army.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Neil Douglas Salisbury
469 F.2d 826 (Eighth Circuit, 1972)
United States v. Lavin
346 F. Supp. 76 (S.D. New York, 1972)
United States v. Kelley
337 F. Supp. 865 (D. Minnesota, 1972)
United States v. Robert E. Lopez
451 F.2d 1311 (Ninth Circuit, 1972)
United States v. Michael Joseph Whalen
451 F.2d 755 (Eighth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Silver
331 F. Supp. 415 (D. Minnesota, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
441 F.2d 726, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 10301, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-of-america-fppellee-v-john-douglas-hedges-ca8-1971.