United States v. Stephen James Harris

Good Law
453 F.2d 862·1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 11968
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 7, 197271-2268California360 words

Opinion

Opinion

Smith, J.

The argument made in support of the appeal is imaginative, but it fails. Appellant following the expiration of a student deferment was classified 1-A late in 1968. In March 1969 he made an application for voluntary induction and in April was ordered to report. He twice failed to report and the indictment followed.

Appellant now claims that his application for a voluntary induction was in fact an offer for a unilateral contract subject to revocation at any time prior to acceptance; that the acceptance could only be the act of induction; and that hence when appellant refused to report for induction he revoked his offer and the order to report based on it became invalid.

This contract approach ignores the fact that duties under the Selective Service System are not consensual.

Young males in the United States have a contingent obligation to serve in the armed forces. The contingent obligation ripens into a fixed obligation (with minor exceptions) when the induction order issues. One who would defeat a criminal prosecution for failing to report on the ground that the induction order is invalid must point out some failure on the part of the Selective Service System to perform the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.