Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Arizona v. Youngblood

United States Supreme Court
488 U.S. 51 (1988)


Facts

Youngblood (defendant) kidnapped a ten-year-old boy and assaulted him for one and a half hours. When the boy finally got home, his mother took him to the hospital where the doctor collected evidence using a sexual assault kit the police department supplied to the hospital. In addition to the blood samples, hair samples, saliva samples, swabs and smears the doctor took, the boy’s underwear and T-shirt were given over to the police. The police examined the sexual assault kit to determine that sexual contact had occurred but did not perform any tests to help identify the assailant. Youngblood was finally arrested about six weeks after the incident. About two years later, the police examined the boy’s clothing for the first time and found two semen stains. The police tried to identify the assailant by testing the semen stains but were unable to do so. The clothing had not been refrigerated during the intervening two years. The police had followed standard department procedures regarding the preservation and testing of evidence. At trial, Youngblood called an expert witness who testified to what could have been shown if further tests had been conducted on the samples or the clothing had been refrigerated. Nonetheless, the jury found Youngblood guilty. The court of appeals reversed the conviction, holding that the destruction of evidence that could have exonerated the defendant was a violation of due process. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Stevens, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Dissent (Blackmun, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.