United States of America, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. David Russell Robinson, Appellant, 435 F.2d 555 (9th Cir. 1971)
Annotate this CaseAppeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; William P. Gray, Judge.
Clark A. Barrett (argued), San Mateo, Cal., for appellant.
J. Kent Steele (argued), Asst. U. S. Atty., Robert L. Meyer, U. S. Atty., David R. Nissen, Chief, Crim. Div., Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.
Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and KILKENNY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
The judgment of conviction is affirmed. Differences from United States v. Stark, 9 Cir., 418 F.2d 901, are not consequential.
Also, we find Chernekoff v. United States, 9 Cir., 219 F.2d 721, relied upon by appellant, to be of no help. In Chernekoff (our requirement on induction that the inductee be ordered to step forward) the service had violated its own definite regulation.
Here Robinson himself deprived the hospital of an opportunity to direct him to do any certain work.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
