 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Delana, No. 05-6084,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals rejected defendant's claim that district court violated the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker when it found he had prior felony convictions that required it to impose a mandatory sentence for violating 21 U.S.C.S. 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1), and it affirmed defendant's sentence of life in prison.
|
|||||
| United States v. Garcia, No. 05-8065,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because there was no filing fee associated with filing a 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion and because denial of a motion to proceed in forma pauperis did not bar the inmate from proceeding with his § 2255 proceeding in the district court, the appellate court lacked jurisdiction over the appeal under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1291 and therefore dismissed the appeal.
|
|||||
| United States v. Martin, No. 05-5012,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate was not entitled to a COA from the denial of habeas relief because it was not debatable whether a district court was correct in concluding that he was procedurally barred from challenging indictment errors that he did not raise on direct appeal and that he failed to show actual prejudice from a charge that triggered 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1).
|
|||||
| United States v. Melgar, No. 05-5001,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although court of appeals found that district court committed plain error when it imposed mandatory sentence under USSG on defendant who violated 21 U.S.C.S. § 841, it found that defendant was not entitled to resentencing because nothing in record showed that district court would have imposed lesser sentence had it known Guidelines were advisory.
|
|||||
| United States v. Robinson, No. 04-7052,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case involving the possession of firearms under 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c)(1)(A), the evidence was sufficient to convict defendant for having a weapon in furtherance of a drug offense because, inter alia, he was attempting to manufacture methamphetamine, the loaded weapon was in close proximity, and defendant struggled with an officer.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
