Case law · Highest court · Federal

Arizona v. Youngblood

Decided
January 23, 1989
Docket
86-1904
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 3,366 timesNo negative treatment found in this library

What later courts said

  • holding that unless defendant can show bad faith on part of police, failure to preserve evidence does not constitute denial of due process of law — State v. Schmidt (1997)
  • holding that the negligent failure by the police to refrigerate evidence did not amount to bad faith — State of Maine v. Clarence Cote (2015)
  • holding that the government's failure to preserve potentially useful evidence not a denial of due process unless defendant can show bad faith on the part of the government — United States v. Arnold Sherlock and Ronald Charley (1992)

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

Chief Justice Rehnquist delivered the opinion of the Court.

Respondent Larry Youngblood was convicted by a Pima County, Arizona, jury of child molestation, sexual assault, and kidnaping. The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed his conviction on the ground that the State had failed to preserve semen samples from the victim’s body and clothing. 153 Ariz. 50, 734 P. 2d 592 (1986). We granted certiorari to consider the extent to which the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires the State to preserve evidentiary material that might be useful to a criminal defendant.

On October 29, 1983, David L., a 10-year-old boy, attended a church service with his mother. After he left the service at about 9:30 p.m., the boy went to a carnival behind the church, where he was abducted by a middle-aged man of medium height and weight. The assailant drove the boy to a secluded area near a ravine and molested him. He then took the boy to an unidentified, sparsely furnished house where he sodomized the boy four times.. Afterwards, the assailant tied the boy up while he went outside to start his car. Once the assailant started the car, albeit with some difficulty, he returned to the house and again sodomized the boy. The assailant then sent the boy to the bathroom to wash up before he returned him to the carnival. He threatened to kill the boy if he told anyone about the attack. The entire ordeal lasted about YA hours.

Cite this

Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51 (1989)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.