UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Louis Felipe CANTERO, Defendant-Appellant

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit1972-12-29No. No. 71-2289

471 F.2d 1190

Summary · law.co

Holding. The local draft board's failure to reopen and independently consider the defendant's medical evidence supporting a disability classification claim, instead deferring solely to the AFEES determination of physical acceptability, was improper. The conviction was reversed.

A defendant appealed his conviction for failing to report for military induction, challenging whether his local draft board properly considered his request for reclassification based on a claimed physical disability. The defendant had initially been classified as fit for service (I-A) and passed a preinduction physical examination. He later submitted medical evidence, including a physician's letter, suggesting he qualified for a disability classification (I-Y) due to bronchial asthma. Although the local board sent him for additional examination at the Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station (AFEES), which again found him acceptable, the board never actually reconsidered his classification request or independently evaluated his medical claims.

The court held that when a registrant presents substantial evidence supporting a disability classification claim, the draft board must reopen the classification file and personally review all available medical information. While the board may appropriately request AFEES to conduct additional examinations and provide medical assessments, the board itself cannot simply defer to AFEES's determination of physical acceptability. Medical acceptability for service purposes does not automatically settle the separate question of proper classification, which remains the board's statutory responsibility. The board's failure to engage in this required independent review violated the defendant's rights.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether a draft board must reopen classification when presented with prima facie evidence of a physical disability claim
Whether AFEES determination of physical acceptability automatically resolves the separate question of proper classification
Whether a draft board satisfies its duty by delegating classification decisions to the Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station

Procedural posture

The defendant appealed his conviction for failure to report for military induction from the trial court.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken from conviction of failure to report for induction into the armed forces, a violation of 50 U.S.C. App. § 462(a). The determinative question upon appeal is whether appellant’s local board properly gave consideration to his claim for a I-Y (physical disability) classification.

Among the disqualifying physical conditions warranting a I-Y classification is “[b]ronchial asthma, except for childhood asthma with a trustworthy history of freedom from symptoms since the 12th birthday.” A.R. 40-501, fl2-26b.

Appellant was classified I-A, and, following preinduction physical examination, was found physically acceptable to the armed forces by the Armed Forces Examining and Entrance Station (AFEES). Appellant then provided the local board with information, including a physician’s letter, which, if accurate, indicated that a change of classification to I-Y by reason of bronchial asthma was warranted. The local board ordered him to return to AFEES for further examination. AFEES adhered to its determination of acceptability. However, the local board did not reopen appellant’s classification, and the record does not indicate that it gave any consideration to his medical claims other than to defer to the AFEES determination of acceptability.

Under United States v. Miller, 455 F.2d 358 (9th Cir. 1972), this does not suffice. The rule that emerges from that case is that when a prima facie case for a I-Y classification has been presented, the classification must be reopened by the board and the question of reclassification must receive board consideration. In cases where, as here, a preinduction physical examination has already been given and the registrant has been determined to be physically acceptable, it is proper for the board to refer the registrant back to AFEES for further examination and an appraisal of the new medical claims. However, the question of classification does not automatically follow from an AFEES determination of acceptability. The board itself must then act on the question. “While medical acceptability may be determined by AFEES * * * classification [may] not,” United States v. Miller, supra, 455 F.2d at 360. and the board’s determination respecting classification “must be exercised in an intelligent manner, based upon a review of all the information then available to them, including information forwarded for medical evaluation.” Id. at 360-361.

We conclude that the local board’s failure to reopen and give the required consideration to appellant’s medical claims rendered his retention in I-A improper.

Reversed. The opinions of this court in United States v. Clemence, 460 F.2d 320 (9th Cir., 1972), and United States v. Smith, 423 F.2d 559 (9th Cir. 1970), are overruled to the extent that they are inconsistent with this opinion.

KILKENNY, Circuit Judge, dissents.

. Lending emphasis to this point, the court in Miller, 455 F.2d at 360, quoted from Eagles v. United States ex rel. Samuels, 329 U.S. 304, 315, 67 S.Ct. 313, 91 L.Ed. 308 (1946), as follows:

“It is plain that the local boards and the hoards of appeal may not abdicate their duty by delegating to others the responsibility for making classifications. That is their statutory function.”