Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Ortiz

United States Court of Military Appeals

Decided December 14, 1981No. 38,815; SPCM 14125Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partCook, Judge

For the reasons set out in my separate opinion in United States v. Nault, 4 M.J. *138318, 320 (C.M.A.1978), I concur with Chief Judge Everett’s determination that the record of police custody of the evidence obtained from the accused was properly before the trial judge for consideration on the question of accused’s guilt. However, I disagree with his conclusion that, as a matter of law, the evidence fails “to link the envelope seized from Ortiz to the laboratory report.”

While on patrol in Rothschild Park, Frankfurt, Germany, two civilian park investigators arrested the accused and took from…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. NaultUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1978
  2. United States v. JonesUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1952
  3. United States v. JessenUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1981
  4. United States v. Lester H. ThurmanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970
  5. United States v. GuzmanU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1977

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API