UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
PETER CHRISTIAN BRANDT, APPELLANT

9th Cir. | 1972-04-27
No. 71-2747
459 F.2d 1035 United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1972) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the defendant's conviction for refusing induction was valid, as his arguments regarding the induction order and failure to seek conscientious objector status were insufficient.


Facts & Procedural History

Peter Brandt was convicted of refusing induction into the Armed Forces. He appealed, arguing the induction order was void due to a delay in mailing af…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Peter Brandt was convicted of refusing to submit to induction into the Armed Forces, a violation of 50 U.S.C. App. § 462, and he appeals.

He asserts that the order to report for induction was void because it was mailed to him more than one year after his qualifying physical examination. He was given the usual examination at the induction center and found qualified for induction, but he contends that this examination did not satisfy the relevant Selective Service and Army regulations. These points were all raised, and found insufficient to void the induction order, in United States v. Wendt, 452 F. 2d 679 (9th Cir. 1971).

Brandt nonetheless urges that United States v. Baray, 445 F. 2d 949 (9th Cir. 1971) requires reversal. In Baray, there was a prejudicial failure to reclassify the registrant after a physical examination had found him disqualified for service. No such facts are present in Brandt’s case, and it presents no substantive points not concluded by United States v. Wendt, supra.

An alternate ground urged for reversal requires little discussion. Brandt failed to apply for conscientious-objector status, contending that to do so would be a useless act. He asserted that the local board had a reputation for granting CO classification under such rigorously limited circumstances that he would be wasting his time. This failure to seek, much less exhaust, an administrative remedy precludes Brandt’s present challenge to the induction order. Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw