United States v. David Greene

Ninth Circuit

United States v. David Greene

456 F.2d 256, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11158

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 23, 1972

Docket71-2636

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 456 F.2d 256 (United States v. David Greene) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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. David Greene, 456 F.2d 256, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11158 (9th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Greene appeals from his conviction for failure to report for induction into the Armed Forces. 50 U.S.C. App. § 462. We affirm.

Appellant argues that the trial court should have given him an opportunity to submit to re-examination at the induction center based upon a possible disqualifying condition discovered after he had failed to report. His crime, however, was complete on May 27, 1970, the day that he failed to report. Any subsequent action or condition was irrelevant to his present conviction. United States v. Maybury, 453 F.2d 1233 (9th Cir. 1972); United States v. Shunk, 438 F.2d 1204 (9th Cir. 1971).

Greene also contends that his local board erred in not considering several letters it received after his order to report for induction had been mailed. Since this issue is raised for the first time on appeal, we need not consider it. United States v. Currier, 453 F.2d 1242 (9th Cir. 1972). However, we observe that the letters presented neither a prima facie case for reclassification nor circumstances beyond Greene’s control. Hence, the board was.not obligated to consider them. Ehlert v. United States, 402 U.S. 99, 91 S.Ct. 1319, 28 L.Ed.2d 625 (1971).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Greene appeals from his conviction for failure to report for induction into the Armed Forces. 50 U.S.C. App. § 462. We affirm.

Appellant argues that the trial court should have given him an opportunity to submit to re-examination at the induction center based upon a possible disqualifying condition discovered after he had failed to report. His crime, however, was complete on May 27, 1970, the day that he failed to report. Any subsequent action or condition was irrelevant to his present conviction. United States v. Maybury, 453 F.2d 1233 (9th Cir. 1972); United States v. Shunk, 438 F.2d 1204 (9th Cir. 1971).

Greene also contends that his local board erred in not considering several letters it received after his order to report for induction had been mailed. Since this issue is raised for the first time on appeal, we need not consider it. United States v. Currier, 453 F.2d 1242 (9th Cir. 1972). However, we observe that the letters presented neither a prima facie case for reclassification nor circumstances beyond Greene’s control. Hence, the board was.not obligated to consider them. Ehlert v. United States, 402 U.S. 99, 91 S.Ct. 1319, 28 L.Ed.2d 625 (1971).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

456 F.2d 256, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-david-greene-ca9-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack