United States v. Manuel
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
GRUNICK, Judge:
The Government failed to retain appellant’s reported cocaine positive urine sample. Under the circumstances of this case, the Government’s failure to exercise due diligence, comply with regulatory guidance and preserve a reported positive urine sample denied appellant equal access to all evidence as required by Article 46, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 846. We set aside appellant’s conviction for the use of cocaine.
FACTS
Appellant was selected to provide a urine sample as part of a random urinalysis conducted at Sheppard Air Force Base on 4 October 1991. The sample was…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- California v. TrombettaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Arizona v. YoungbloodSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- United States v. CaceresSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. PeoplesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1990
- United States v. GarriesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. ManuelCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995
- United States v. ManuelCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995