CASE LAW UPDATE: Whether the urine sample established defendant’s parole violation?
Defendant was on supervised release parole. He was charged with a parole violation. Defendant was found guilty and his supervised release was revoked. He appealed. On appeal, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the revocation on the grounds that a drug test administrator had provided testimony about a urine sample and that constituted ample evidence to find that defendant violated his supervised release. Affirmed.
United States v. Christinson, 21-1535, per curiam. Appealed from the United States District Court, Southern District of Iowa.
Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.