United States v. Craig Malone Thomas, 422 F.2d 1327 (9th Cir. 1970).
United States v. Craig Malone Thomas, 422 F.2d 1327 (9th Cir. 1970). Book View Copy Cite
Positive Treatment Followed 1 positive
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Craig Malone THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant
24749_1.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Feb 9, 1970.
422 F.2d 1327
Richard Weinstein (argued), San Francisco, Cal., for defendant-appellant., Paul G. Sloan (argued), Asst. U. S. Atty., Cecil F. Poole, U. S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
Barnes, Browning, Per Curiam, Wright.
Cited by 10 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

Craig Malone Thomas appeals from a judgment finding him guilty of violating 50 U.S.C.App. § 462, refusal to submit to induction. The induction order upon which he was convicted resulted from his having been processed as a “delinquent” for “failure to cooperate and complete” his Armed Forces physical examination following his classification as I-A. We reverse.

In Gutknecht v. United States, 396 U.S. 295, 90 S.Ct. 506, 24 L.Ed.2d 532 (dee. Jan. 19, 1970,) the delinquency regulations used here were held to be unauthorized by statute. See also Breen v. Selective Service Local Board No. 16, 396 U.S. 460, 90 S.Ct. 661, 24 L.Ed.2d 653 (dec. Jan. 26, 1970). For the reasons given in Gutknecht, swpra, we hold that Thomas did not fail to exhaust his admin [*1328] istrative remedies. Finally, having classified him delinquent, it must be assumed absent a showing to the contrary that the board followed the regulatory command (32 C.F.R. § 1642.13) and accelerated his induction which, in turn, affected the registrant’s substantial rights. United States v. Baker, 416 F.2d 202, 204-205 (9th Cir. 1969).

Reversed.