United States v. Verstell Willis

409 F.2d 830, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12747
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 18, 1969
Docket26748_1
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 409 F.2d 830 (United States v. Verstell Willis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. Verstell Willis, 409 F.2d 830, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12747 (5th Cir. 1969).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a denial of a IV-D selective service classification (ministerial exemption) by Local Board No. 141, Tift County, Georgia. Appellant Verstell Willis was originally classified as I-A by the local board; however, this designation was modified to a 1-0 classification (conscientious objector) by the Appeals Board. Willis subsequently refused to report for civilian employment and was therefore convicted of violating the Universal Military Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C. App. § 462 (1964). The district judge heard the case without a jury and sentenced Willis to two years imprisonment.

Appellant Willis, a Jehovah’s Witness, contended before the local board that he qualified for a ministerial exemption in that he has studied the Bible since he was twelve years of age and has attended and is attending the Theocratic (Ministry) School; is actively preaching his beliefs and attends all church meetings; has given public expression to his views at the ministry school and in door-to-door field ministry; has dedicated his life exclusively to Jehovah; and is a Congregation Publisher of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. The trial court held that these facts were insufficient to make out a prima facie case before the board for a ministerial exemption. During the trial, Willis further revealed that he held the positions of Magazine and Territory Servant and Literature Servant in his church.

After a thorough and sifting review of the case law, the Court concludes that the decision of the trial judge must stand. The teachings of Matyastik v. United States, 392 F.2d 657 (5 Cir., 1968), acknowledge that the “burden is on the registrant to make out a prima facie case for exemption before the local board”. Under the treble test developed in Fitts v. United States, 334 F.2d 416 (5 Cir., 1964), as to the determination of the ministerial exemption, Willis fails to make a prima facie case for the exemption. Since the newly alleged facts at the trial failed to adequately supplement the evidence in making a prima facie case, we affirm the trial court.

*832 Willis’ final contention is without merit in that we have recently decided that there is no guaranteed constitutional right to counsel in dealings with a local selective service board. Merritt v. United States, 401 F.2d 768 (5 Cir., 1968).

We affirm.

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

Related

Wolcott v. Norton
365 F. Supp. 138 (D. Connecticut, 1973)
William M. Radcliffe v. J. J. Clark, Warden
451 F.2d 250 (Fifth Circuit, 1971)
United States v. Reeves
325 F. Supp. 179 (M.D. Florida, 1971)
Thomas Darrell Camp v. United States
413 F.2d 419 (Fifth Circuit, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
409 F.2d 830, 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 12747, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-verstell-willis-ca5-1969.