 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| United States v. Saenz-Gomez, No. 06-2148,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment entered by state court which convicted defendant of drug offenses was final when it was entered, not when appeal was denied, and federal district court correctly found that defendant was subject to sentence enhancement under USSG § 2L1.2(b)(1)(B) because he reentered U.S. illegally after he was deported for committing felony drug offenses.
|
|||||
| United States v. Soehnge, No. 06-1212,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Neither defendant nor the record provided sufficient contradictions for the court to find the district court clearly erred in finding that defendant jointly participated in a fraudulent scheme and holding her accountable for the joint loss of nearly $ 1 million which increased her offense level by 14 levels pursuant to USSG § 1B1.3(1) (2005).
|
|||||
| United States v. Trinnaman, No. 06-4082,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate challenging denial of 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 petitions was not entitled to COA pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(2) because, although counsel made sentencing calculation error in requesting downward departure, there was no indication that sentencing judge relied upon miscalculation and nothing indicated that scale of departure was unreasonable.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
