United States v. Dana Xavier Harris

Sixth Circuit

United States v. Dana Xavier Harris

438 F.2d 1229, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11595

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedMarch 2, 1971

Docket20564

StatusPublished

This text of 438 F.2d 1229 (United States v. Dana Xavier Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Dana Xavier Harris, 438 F.2d 1229, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11595 (6th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals from his conviction of violation of the Selective Service Law, after a waiver of jury trial, and was sentenced under the Youth Correction Act, 18 U.S.C. § 5010(b). He was classified I-A on December 17, 1968 and did not appeal. He was ordered to report for preinduction physical and was found fit for induction. On April 18, 1969 he was ordered to report for induction on May 5, 1969. On May 5, 1969 he reported to his Selective Service Board and tendered a note stating that “because of recently changed moral beliefs, I ask for a transfer of this induction so I can fill out form 150.” (Conscientious Objector form) He was given the form but never returned it to the Selective Service Board. He was sent to the Induction Station but refused induction.

Appellant relies upon Mulloy v. United States, 398 U.S. 410, 90 S.Ct. 1766, 26 L.Ed.2d 362. This Court is satisfied that Mulloy is readily distinguishable upon its facts. In Mulloy the petitioner completed Selective Service Form 150 before he was called for induction and attached letters from five people attesting to his honesty and integrity.

We do not reach the issue as to the validity of the regulation found at 32 C. F.R., Section 1625.2, because the appellant failed to provide the Selective Service Board with any facts which, if true, would justify a change in the appellant’s classification. He provided only a statement of a conclusion, unsupported by any facts.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals from his conviction of violation of the Selective Service Law, after a waiver of jury trial, and was sentenced under the Youth Correction Act, 18 U.S.C. § 5010(b). He was classified I-A on December 17, 1968 and did not appeal. He was ordered to report for preinduction physical and was found fit for induction. On April 18, 1969 he was ordered to report for induction on May 5, 1969. On May 5, 1969 he reported to his Selective Service Board and tendered a note stating that “because of recently changed moral beliefs, I ask for a transfer of this induction so I can fill out form 150.” (Conscientious Objector form) He was given the form but never returned it to the Selective Service Board. He was sent to the Induction Station but refused induction.

Appellant relies upon Mulloy v. United States, 398 U.S. 410, 90 S.Ct. 1766, 26 L.Ed.2d 362. This Court is satisfied that Mulloy is readily distinguishable upon its facts. In Mulloy the petitioner completed Selective Service Form 150 before he was called for induction and attached letters from five people attesting to his honesty and integrity.

We do not reach the issue as to the validity of the regulation found at 32 C. F.R., Section 1625.2, because the appellant failed to provide the Selective Service Board with any facts which, if true, would justify a change in the appellant’s classification. He provided only a statement of a conclusion, unsupported by any facts.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

438 F.2d 1229, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11595, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dana-xavier-harris-ca6-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack