Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive
Search
Yahoo! News
Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
United States of America, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Joseph Anthony Davis, Appellant
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 447 F.2d 1376
Aug. 12, 1971, Rehearing Denied Sept. 13, 1971
Daniel Kannlen (argued), Somers & Kallen, Santa Monica, Cal., for appellant.
Elgin Edwards, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), Robert L. Meyer, U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Before CHAMBERS and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges, and POWELL, District judge.
PER CURIAM:
The judgment of conviction in this selective service case is affirmed.
Davis contends that the implication of Gutknecht v. United States, 396 U.S. 295, 90 S.Ct. 506, 24 L.Ed.2d 532, and other cases require a finding here that induction was accelerated because of his delinquency. On the record, we think not.
United States v. Davis (9th Cir. 1970), 432 F.2d 1009; Misenhimer v. United States (9th Cir. July 22, 1971) 71-1384; and United States v. Pennington (9th Cir. 1971), 439 F.2d 145, require affirmance. We find United States v. Dobie, 444 F.2d 417 (4th Cir., 1971) distinguishable.
The mandate will issue now.