UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
JAMES ALAN FERBER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the local board did not err in refusing to reopen the appellant's classification because the change in law relied upon occurred before the induction notice was sent.
Appellant was convicted of refusing induction. He claimed his local board erred in refusing to reopen his classification to consider his conscientious…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Change In Status cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Appellant was convicted of refusing induction, 50 U.S.C. App. § 462. Appellant’s main contention is that his local board erred in refusing to reopen his I-A classification to consider his conscientious objector claim filed after he received an order to report for induction.
Appellant argues that his claim rested on non-religious grounds, and that, therefore, the Supreme Court’s decision in Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333, 90 S.Ct. 1792, 26 L.Ed.2d 308 (1970), permitting non-religious conscientious objector claims, was a material “change in status over which he had no control within the meaning of Regulation 32 C.F.R. § 1625.2.”
Welsh was decided before appellant’s induction notice was sent, however, and, under section 1625.2, a change of status must occur after the notice to warrant reopening a registrant's classification. United States v. Van Becker, 438 F. 2d 1224, 1225 (9th Cir. 1971); United States v. Uhl, 436 F. 2d 773, 774 (9th Cir. 1970). Moreover, appellant’s letter accompanying his conscientious objector questionnaire reflects a prima facie conscientious objector claim under traditional, religiously based, pre-Welsh standards. Welsh therefore worked no change in appellant’s status.
We have carefully considered the remaining points raised by appellant and find them without merit.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (U.S. 1970)
- United States v. UHL, 436 F.2d 773 (9th Cir. 1970)
- United States v. van Becker, 438 F.2d 1224 (9th Cir. 1971)