United States v. Kalish
United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico
271 F. Supp. 968 (1976)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Scott Tully Kalish (defendant) was drafted to serve in the Vietnam War. On the advice of his attorney and under the belief that he had a constitutional right to refuse, Kalish did not report for induction. Kalish was charged with failure to report for induction. The United States attorney and Kalish’s attorney agreed to resolve the charge by having Kalish request to reopen his case with the Selective Service System (the Selective Service), and if the Selective Service refused, then Kalish was to report for induction. The United States attorney and Kalish’s attorney agreed to a continuance of the case against Kalish in the meantime, but Kalish was to return to court to report the outcome of his request to the Selective Service. The Selective Service did not reopen the matter, and Kalish did report for induction with the Army, where he was photographed and fingerprinted. When Kalish returned to court on May 3, 1967, the United States Marshals Service arrested Kalish and took photographs of Kalish as well as his fingerprints as part of his arrest record, but the criminal charges against Kalish were dismissed. Kalish then moved for an order to expunge and destroy the photographs and fingerprints in his arrest record maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cancio, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.