 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Madrid-Monge, No. 06-7050,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate was not entitled to COA to appeal denial of his 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion because he failed to show any denial of constitutional rights. His counsel raised application of safety valve provision of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(f), but inmate rejected opportunities to take advantage of the provision by refusing to offer information to the government.
|
|||||
| United States v. Meadows, No. 06-5152,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a district court's explanation was reasoned and reasonable, a 12-month prison term did not exceed the statutory maximum, and the district court was not obligated to impose another term of supervisory release to include drug treatment, the court affirmed a sentence imposed after revocation of defendant's supervised release.
|
|||||
| United States v. Pedraza, No. 06-2113,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A defendant's appeal was construed as a COA application and denied because he failed to demonstrate extraordinary circumstances that would justify relief from judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b); moreover, the decision in Crosby v. Gonzalez in no way affected Tenth Circuit precedent requiring such a showing.
|
|||||
| United States v. Walker, No. 05-2287,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Deputy's entry into defendant's home was not unlawful because the deputy opening the storm door to knock on the inner door, even though the inner door was partially open, was not a Fourth Amendment intrusion because such action did not violate an occupant's reasonable expectation of privacy.
|
|||||
| Watson v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, No. 06-3323,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, January 31, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of a complaint on statute of limitations grounds was affirmed because it appeared that a prisoner's mental disability was removed and that he was capable of preparing and filing his complaint, but that he failed to commence the action within one year after the disability was removed as required by Kan. Stat. Ann. § 60-513(a).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
