United States v. Norman Arthur Newlon

Ninth Circuit

United States v. Norman Arthur Newlon

460 F.2d 1268, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9878

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedApril 27, 1972

Docket71-2393

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 460 F.2d 1268 (United States v. Norman Arthur Newlon) 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. Norman Arthur Newlon, 460 F.2d 1268, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9878 (9th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken from conviction of failure to report for induction into the Armed Forces of the United States, a violation of 50 U.S.C.App. § 462(a). Issues are raised respecting the manner in which appellant’s conscientious objection claim was handled by the local and appeal boards and appellant’s ability to secure judicial review of that matter. These we need not reach. In our judgment reversal is compelled by Fisher v. United States, 413 F.2d 1034 (9th Cir. 1969). See also Graves v. United States, 252 F.2d 878 (9th Cir. 1958).

Appellant was indicted for knowing failure to report “on or about March 11, 1968.” Because of his absence from his place of residence he did not receive his order to report on that date until a few days after the date. Under Fisher, supra, failure to report on the date ordered is not knowing in these circumstances.

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken from conviction of failure to report for induction into the Armed Forces of the United States, a violation of 50 U.S.C.App. § 462(a). Issues are raised respecting the manner in which appellant’s conscientious objection claim was handled by the local and appeal boards and appellant’s ability to secure judicial review of that matter. These we need not reach. In our judgment reversal is compelled by Fisher v. United States, 413 F.2d 1034 (9th Cir. 1969). See also Graves v. United States, 252 F.2d 878 (9th Cir. 1958).

Appellant was indicted for knowing failure to report “on or about March 11, 1968.” Because of his absence from his place of residence he did not receive his order to report on that date until a few days after the date. Under Fisher, supra, failure to report on the date ordered is not knowing in these circumstances.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

460 F.2d 1268, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 9878, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-norman-arthur-newlon-ca9-1972.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack