 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Allen v. 1998 Chief Med. Officer, No. 06-6177,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a prisoner's failure to exhaust all available administrative remedies as required by 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997e(a) could not be excused, and because the complaint contained unexhausted claims, it had to be dismissed in its entirety.
|
|||||
| Cicero v. (FNU) Mitchell, Nos. 06-3109 and 06-3162,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court disagreed with the decision to dismiss a prisoner's Bivens claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies on a claim of racial discrimination; the court saw no allegation regarding racial discrimination, and the prisoner previously documented the exhaustion of his Bivens claim for religious discrimination.
|
|||||
| Farrell v. Soares, No. 05-1141,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Habeas relief was properly denied to petitioner because, although the admission of a video of his co-defendant's interrogation violated petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him, the error was harmless as his co-defendant's statement was not particularly probative on the key issue in the case, petitioner's sanity.
|
|||||
| Marshall v. Columbia Lea Reg'l Hosp., No. 05-2173,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of officers' post-verdict motion for judgment as a matter of law based on qualified immunity was affirmed where N.M. Stat. Ann. § 66-8-111(A) clearly precluded a warrantless, nonconsensual blood test for an alleged misdemeanor. Thus, a reasonable officer would have understood that such a test violated the arrestee's Fourth Amendment rights.
|
|||||
| United States v. Barbosa, No. 06-6267,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the factors set forth in United States v. Hahn were satisfied, the appeal waiver in defendant's plea agreement was enforced, and the appeal dismissed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Browner, No. 05-6005,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim fell within the exception to the enforceability of the plea appeal waiver in his plea agreement; however, it was dismissed for determination on collateral review. The mandatory application of the sentencing guidelines was not harmless error and the case was remanded for resentencing.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hendricks, No. 06-6086,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court adequately considered the relevant sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a), and the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing 26-months sentence following defendant's revocation of supervised release and departing from the guideline range under USSG § 7B1.1 through 7B1.4, nor was the sentence unreasonable.
|
|||||
| United States v. Tilghman, No. 05-3382,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Having found that the government did not breach a plea agreement by not moving for a downward departure at sentencing under USSG § 5K1.1 and 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(e) where the record did not show bad faith and only suggested a difference of opinion whether defendant "assisted" the government, the appeal waiver was enforced and the appeal dismissed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
