 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Fry v. Al-Abduljalil, No. 05-1179,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's claim in his 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 suit that a cellmate poisoned his drink, causing a stomach injury, did not satisfy 42 U.S.C.S. § 1997e(e)'s "physical injury" requirement. His personal belief that this occurred, unsupported by medical evidence, was insufficient to demonstrate a triable issue of fact so as to overcome summary judgment.
|
|||||
| Haimour v. Gonzales, No. 05-9520,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An immigrant's application for restriction on removal was denied because he failed to show that he was persecuted due to membership in a particular social group under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1231(b)(3)(A); no immutable characteristics were shown where there was a claim of persecution by a family due to an adulterous relationship.
|
|||||
| Tucker v. Meyer, No. 05-7057,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for prison officials on a 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 claim for Eighth Amendment violations was affirmed because the officials did not confess judgment, the officials were not responsible for assigning the inmate to a boot camp, and the officials were not indifferent to his medical needs at the boot camp.
|
|||||
| United States v. Crockett, No. 04-4204,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals affirmed defendant's convictions on charges alleging that he violated 18 U.S.C.S. § 371 and 26 U.S.C.S. § 7206(2) when he helped a family establish trusts to reduce their federal income tax liability and also helped them prepare tax returns, but remanded for resentencing because district court imposed mandatory sentence under USSG.
|
|||||
| United States v. Davis, No. 05-4209,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A request for a COA under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(1)(B) to appeal the denial of a 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion was denied because an inmate's counsel was not ineffective for failing to assert that 18 U.S.C.S. § 2422(b) required the involvement of an actual minor where the inmate conversed with an undercover FBI agent posing as a 13-year-old female.
|
|||||
| United States v. Wolfe, No. 04-2114,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Upward departure was improper as it was based on contradictory statements in PSR, as such failed to provide a sufficient factual basis to support finding defendant was driving at speed amounting to excessive recklessness and finding drunk driving posed threat to public welfare as it caused deaths, accounted for by excessive recklessness departure.
|
|||||
| West v. Barnhart, No. 05-1266,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The affirmance of the denial of a claimant's applications for supplemental security income benefits under the Social Security Act was affirmed because the district court thoroughly analyzed each of the claimant's claims, and the district court's analysis and conclusions were persuasive.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
