Court Opinion

ID: 9459551
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 21:23:49.889649+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:36:12.885926
License: Public Domain

FAIRCHILD, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I agree that there has been a sufficient showing to warrant judicial in*625quiry into the motives of the prosecutor. This is indeed an exceptional area of national life where conscientious opposition to government policy has been intertwined with violations of the laws which implement the policy.
I would add one further point, with respect to the sentence imposed. Defendant was given an aggregate three year sentence for his card violations, as much as or more than he would probably have received if his induction order had been lawful. The judge apparently considered an ill-advised and offensive remark defendant made to his Board. In any event, the sentence appears grossly disproportionate to the circumstances of the offenses. I would readily concede that one who knowingly commits an offense as a means of protest deliberately risks the penalty. In a sense his exposure to sacrifice is a means of making his protest meaningful. On the other hand, the card offenses here can not be considered serious, nor to have threatened, under the circumstances, the government’s legitimate objective in requiring the possession of cards.
Even if the prosecution were deemed lawful on remand, I believe the aggregate sentence must be substantially reduced.