Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number No. 71-3484. Summary Calendar. Attorney(S) William S. Sessions, U.S. Atty., Charles B. Tennison, San Antonio, Tex., for appellants-respondents. Leonard J. Schwartz, Patrick D. Burke, San Antonio, Tex., Rigely, Schwartz, Fagan Burke, Inc., San Antonio, Tex., for appellee-petitioner. Judges Griffin Boyette Bell Charles Clark See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. JAMES J. HOWE, JR., APPELLEE-PETITIONER, v. MELVIN R. LAIRD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ET AL., APPELLANTS-RESPONDENTS. PER CURIAM. The district court concluded that there was no basis in fact for the denial by the Army of conscientious objector status to appellee. We agree. Helwick v. Laird, 5 Cir., 1971, 438 F.2d 959; Kessler v. United States, 5 Cir., 1969, 406 F.2d 151. The finding of the district court that appellee's statement in support of his application for discharge, if sincere, made out a prima facie case, is not disputed. The Army was of the view that appellee lacked the depth of conviction required to qualify for discharge as a conscientious objector. This result rested on the disbelief of appellee by the Army officials who interviewed him. We are unable to find any ". . . affirmative evidence to support the rejection . . ." nor is there anything in the record which ". . substantially blurs the picture painted by [appellee] and thus casts doubt on his sincerity . . ." Kessler v. United States, supra, 406 F.2d at 156. Affirmed.