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.
	Federal Courts - 10th Circuit Court of Appeals - January 3, 2007
	United States v. Montano, No. 06-2009, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 3, 2007, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Defendant's appeal was dismissed because the district court's attempted oral modification of defendant's accepted plea agreement, after sentencing, did not alter the substance of the agreement. Thus, the agreement stood as written and included the waiver of defendant's right to appeal. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	United States v. Shaffer, No. 06-3145, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 3, 2007, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Testimony of defendant's computer expert that defendant did not knowingly possess or distribute unlawful child pornography as opposed to adult pornography, went to defendant's state of mind, and thus, was inadmissible because under Fed. R. Evid. 704(b), expert witnesses were not allowed to testify about the ultimate issues in the case. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Whitington v. Ortiz, No. 06-1362, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 3, 2007, Filed View this case - free   Overview: In dismissing a prisoner's complaint, the district court erred in concluding that the prisoner failed to exhaust his claims under the PLRA when he filed suit while his grievance was pending because no timely response had been filed to his grievance which effectively exhausted his remedies and he had not inserted a third unexhausted claim. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Back to Top
	www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us   Copyright© 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.