[Download] "Jackie Lee Hinkle v. United States America" by United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. * eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Jackie Lee Hinkle v. United States America
- Author : United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.
- Release Date : January 24, 1954
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 60 KB
Description
Hinkle was found guilty of a violation of the Universal Training and Service Act, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix, ? 451 et seq., in that he knowingly refused to submit to induction. Upon this appeal from the judgment of conviction he asserts there was no basis in fact for not classifying him as a conscientious objector in accordance with his claim to exemption from military service upon that ground. By executing the form provided for that purpose and filing it with the local board, he claimed that he was opposed to both non-combatant and combatant military service, and that this opposition was based upon his religious belief as a member of Jehovahs Witnesses. The local board classified him in Class I-A, that is to say, as available for military service. He appealed his classification; his file was forwarded to the appeal board, and the case was referred to the Department of Justice. Following a hearing before a hearing officer the Department made a report and recommendation to the appeal board. The Department, in making its recommendation as to the action of the appeal board, stated that it found, on the basis of the hearing officers report, that Hinkle was reared in the Jehovahs Witnesses faith; that he based his opposition to war upon parental guidance and Bible study under the auspices of his church. On the basis of reports from available sources it was stated that Hinkle was "honest, sincere and of excellent character". No derogatory information was developed by the FBI. Notwithstanding all this, the hearing officer and the Department of Justice found that Hinkle was not within "the category of a true conscientious objector" first, because he had stated in answer to questions that he believed that he might kill in self defense and in the protection of his home, and second, because he expressed a belief in the justification of theocratic warfare of the kind described in the Old Testament.