United States v. Tyhurst
U S Air Force Court of Military Review
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION
KASTL, Senior Judge:
Are analog or so-called designer drugs punishable under the current language of Article 112a, UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. § 912a? Frequently they are not, we hold today.
Airman First Class (A1C) Tyhurst was found guilty in accordance with his pleas of various drug-related offenses involving cocaine, methamphetamine, marijuana, and lysergic acid diethylamide. In addition, he offered a conditional guilty plea as to use and distribution of N-hydroxy-3, 4-methy-lenedioxy amphetamine. The substance was characterized at trial — wrongly, we are advised — by the street name of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. SalesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1986
- United States v. McKinleyUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1988
- United States v. David Augustine Desurra, and Sammy Lee Smith, United States of America v. Arthur Breaux, IIICourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1989
- Reckitt & Colman, Ltd. v. Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration, McNeil Pharmaceutical, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1986
- United States v. StockenU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- United States v. ReichenbachUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1989
- United States v. LoftinU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1989
- United States v. LoftinU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1989
- United States v. TyhurstU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1989