What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals.
Intervenors who participated as parties at the courts of appeals should be counted as either appellants or respondents when it can be determined whose position they supported. For example, if there were two plaintiffs who lost in district court, appealed, and were joined by four intervenors who also asked the court of appeals to reverse the district court, the number of appellants should be coded as six.
When coding the detailed nature of participants, use your personal knowledge about the participants, if you are completely confident of the accuracy of your knowledge, even if the specific information is not in the opinion. For example, if "IBM" is listed as the appellant it could be classified as "clearly national or international in scope" even if the opinion did not indicate the scope of the business. 

Your task concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". Your task is to determine the race or ethnic identity of this litigant as identified in the opinion. Names may be used to classify a person as hispanic if there is little ambiguity. All aliens are coded as "not ascertained".

Opinion:
John W. MORTON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.
No. 12824.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Nov. 16, 1955.
Decided Dec. 8, 1955.
Appellant filed a brief, pro se, and his case was treated as submitted thereon.
Mr. John W. Kern, III, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Mr. Leo A. Rover, U. S. Atty., and Messrs. Lewis Carroll and Edward O. Fennell, Asst. U. S. Attys., were-on the brief, for appellee.
Before PRETTYMAN, WILBUR K. MILLER, and WASHINGTON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was convicted in 1943— twelve years ago — of murder in the second degree. This court affirmed. Since then he has filed petitions for habeas corpus in the Eastern District of Virginia and the Western District of Missouri, and this is the ninth motion to vacate sentence which he has filed in this jurisdiction. The District Court appointed counsel and held a hearing. It denied the motion.
Appellant’s brief in this court is forty-eight typewritten pages, thirty-nine of them devoted to alleged errors, largely concerning evidence and inferences therefrom, upon the original trial. The remaining pages relate to the present motion but deal with the conduct of his trial counsel, the admission of evidence, alleged bias of the trial judge, and the weight of the evidence. We find no error in the District Court’s denial of the motion.
Affirmed.
. 1945, 79 U.S.App.D.C. 329, 147 F.2d 28, certiorari denied 1945, 324 U.S. 875, 65 S.Ct. 1015, 89 L.Ed. 1428.
. Morton v. Welch, 4 Cir., 1947, 162 F. 2d 840, certiorari denied 1947, 332 U.S. 779, 68 S.Ct. 44, 92 L.Ed. 363, Id., 1948, 334 U.S. 848, 68 S.Ct. 1498, 92 L.Ed. 1771.
. Morton v. Steele, 8 Cir., 1950, 179 F.2d 956, certiorari denied 1950, 339 U.S. 969, 70 S.Ct. 987, 94 L.Ed. 1377.
. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, 62 Stat. 967 (1948) as amended.

Question: This question concerns the first listed appellant. The nature of this litigant falls into the category "natural person (excludes persons named in their official capacity or who appear because of a role in a private organization)". What is the race or ethnic identity of this litigant as identified in the opinion?

Choices:
not ascertained
caucasian - specific indication in opinion
black - specific indication in opinion
native american - specific indication in opinion
native american - assumed from name
asian - specific indication in opinion
asian - assumed from name
hispanic - specific indication in opinion
hispanic - assumed from name
other

Answer: 0