United States v. John Carl Hulphers, Jr.

Defendant appeals his conviction of refusing to submit to induction into the armed forces. 50 U.S.C.App. § 462. We affirm.

Defendant contends that the conviction must be reversed because the local board, after classifying him I-A, did not meet and order him to report for induction. But as we pointed out in United States v. Baker, 416 F.2d 202, 204 (9th Cir. 1969), “an order of the Board contingent upon a later call is valid and * * * such an order may be implied from the action of a board in classifying a registrant I-A.” Accord, United States v. Rusk, 419 F.2d 133 (9th Cir. Nov. 28, 1969); United States v. Doran, 418 F.2d 1226 (9th Cir. Nov. 10, 1969).

Defendant also contends that the government failed to sustain its burden of proof since there was no evidence in the record that the local board had adopted a resolution pursuant to 32 C.F.R. § 1604.59 , authorizing its clerk to sign induction orders, “It is the settled general rule that all necessary prerequisites to the validity of official action are presumed to have been complied with, and that where the contrary is asserted it must be affirmatively shown” Lewis v. United States, 279 U.S. 63, 73 , 49 S.Ct. 257, 260 , 73 L.Ed.…