A case out of Louisville involving how urine samples are collected is being appealed.
The plaintiff in the case is a Louisville man who was accused of a crime. He accepted early release on the condition that he submit to occasional drug tests. When a third party company tested him, however, the test’s administrator observed the man urinating, which is the company’s policy.
Plaintiff’s attorney Greg Belzley says the observation violated laws governing strip and cavity searches.
“It was wrong absent some reasonable suspicion, some basis for the testing, the tester or the collector to believe he might try to adulterate or manipulate his sample,” says Belzley.
A federal judge ruled against the plaintiff saying no laws were violated. Belzley is appealing the case and hopes to have a decision by next summer.
{ Comments on this entry are closed }