John Dean Wallace, Jr. v. James Schlesinger, as Secretary of Defense
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
MORELL E. SHARP,
District Judge (concurring, dissenting in part):
I concur with the majority in concluding that the judgment of the district court cannot be affirmed for the reason that the finding of the Assistant Chief, expressed in his denial letter is ambiguous. The letter seems to indicate that the plaintiff’s views have not changed except in degree since acceptance of his commission. The majority interprets this finding as an unjustified reliance on 32 C.F.R. § 730.18(b), which denies conscientious objection discharge when an in-service applicant’s views were crystalized prior to entry…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Carl J. Christensen v. Reginald A. FranklinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Zemke v. LarsenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1970
- Seaman David Alfred Tellez v. John Chaffee, Secretary of the NavyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1972
- Walter Jon Pinkus v. Willard C. Pearson, Commanding General of Fort Lewis and Stanley Resor, Secretary of the ArmyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971