¶1*1290Saltzman & Goldin, Hollywood, Cal., for defendant-appellant.
¶2Robert L. Meyer, U. S. Atty., Eric A. Nobles, Chief, Crim. Div., D. Henry Thayer, Asst. U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.
¶3Before CHAMBERS and CHOY, Circuit Judges, and BATTIN,* District Judge.
¶6The judgment of conviction in this selective service case is affirmed.
¶7The charge was that he failed to keep his local board advised of his address so that mail could reach him (here a notice of induction) while he traveled around with carnivals.
¶8Whether he made a good faith effort to keep the board informed was a question of fact which has been decided against him on sufficient evidence.
¶9Here the defendant testified. Lack of belief of a witness often permits some affirmative inferences. In our view, this is just such a case. Such inferences may have buttressed up other evidence.