Legal Opinion

United States v. Heupel

U S Air Force Court of Military Review

Decided October 17, 1985No. 85A-02PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION

SESSOMS, Senior Judge:

At trial the Military Judge granted a defense motion to suppress evidence regarding the results of a urinalysis test pertaining to the accused. The government appeals that decision under Article 62, U.C.M.J., 10 U.S.C. § 862, RCM 908, and Rule 21, AFR 111-4 (12 July 1985). We find that the military judge ruled correctly.

The following recitation of the facts is derived directly from the trial judge’s findings of fact. As part of the punishment imposed under Article 15, U.C.M.J., 10 U.S.C. § 815, for a 2-day AWOL, the accused was ordered into correctional custody…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. United States v. LewisU S Air Force Court of Military Review · 1985
  2. United States v. BeaulieuU S Coast Guard Court of Military Review · 1985

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. United States v. ScottUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987
  2. United States v. InghamCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1995
  3. United States v. KellyU.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review · 1991
  4. United States v. CorriereU.S. Army Court of Military Review · 1987
  5. United States v. HastonUnited States Court of Military Appeals · 1987

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API