Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Drozd

decided: March 26, 1975.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPELLEE,
v.
DOUGLAS B. DROZD, APPELLANT



ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY (D.C. Crim. No. 395-72).

Van Dusen, Gibbons, and Hunter, Circuit Judges.

Author: Gibbons

Opinion OF THE COURT

GIBBONS, Circuit Judge.

Douglas Drozd appeals from a judgment of sentence following conviction on an indictment charging him with wilfully refusing to submit to induction in violation of 50 U.S.C., Appendix, ยง 462. Drozd waived both a jury trial and the provision of Rule 23(c) Fed. R. Crim. P. that the court on request find the facts specially.

The government presented no testimony, but offered four exhibits which were received in evidence. Exhibit G-1 is the registrant's selective service file. Exhibit G-2 is a letter dated February 25, 1972 from Williard I. Silverberg, Regional Counsel for Region III, Selective Service System to the New Jersey State Director of the Selective Service System. Exhibit G-3 is a letter from Mr. Silverberg to the State Director, dated March 16, 1972. Exhibit G-4 is a letter from Mr. Silverberg to the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey also dated March 16, 1972. When these exhibits were received in evidence, and certain historical facts which had been stipulated to were related, the government rested. Drozd then made a motion for a judgment of acquittal on the ground that the file did not establish that the Selective Service System properly rejected his conscientious objector claim. The court reserved decision and Drozd offered no testimony. The court, after reviewing the selective service file, found the defendant guilty. The sentence appealed from followed.

Before turning to the selective service file, we note that exhibits G-2, G-3, and G-4, while interesting, do not add anything of substance to the government's case. Exhibit G-2 reads:

"The file of the subject registrant is returned.

It is the opinion of this office that the local board must state why the registrant failed to convince them of his sincerity. The reasons must be based on facts in the file derived from his personal appearance."

The date stamps show that G-2 was received at the New Jersey State Headquarters, Selective Service System on February 29, 1972, and at the Local Board March 30, 1972, although no copy appears in G-1.

Exhibit G-3 reads:

"The file of the subject registrant is returned. He was reported to the United States Attorney for prosecution on this date.

Please notify this office of any change in status of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.