Legal Opinion

Burl Melton Howze v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 28, 1959No. 16378PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

STEPHENS, Circuit Judge.

The appellant has been convicted of failing to remain in employment after he was assigned civilian work upon being classified 1-0 (conscientious objector) by his local draft board. Title 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix, § 462. He appeals his conviction on three grounds: That he should have been classified II-C (essential farm worker); that the proof did not conform to the charge; and, that the order of the Draft Board to perform civilian labor was unconstitutional.

A II-C classification is authorized when the registrant is engaged in producing a substantial quantity of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. United States v. Armand Fred Hoepker, United States of America v. Walter Gail Thomas, United States of America v. Edward L. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1955

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. United States v. Richard Mather BoardmanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1970
  2. United States v. Albert H. HolmesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1968
  3. Richard Arlen Badger v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1963
  4. Roe v. Unocal Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 1999
  5. United States v. Wayne Lee CampbellCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API