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 - February 5, 2007
	Spriggs v. Addison, No. 06-6241, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Because a district court's dismissal of a prisoner's § 2254 petition as untimely was not deserving of further proceedings or subject to a different resolution on appeal, the prisoner was not entitled to a COA to challenge the dismissal and his appeal was dismissed. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	United States v. Brakeman, No. 06-2139, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Warrant to search defendant's property was sufficiently particular to satisfy the Fourth Amendment where the warrant described, in some detail, defendant's property, and to the extent that the warrant was unclear as to whether the property to be searched was a neighbor's or defendant's, the deputy's personal knowledge resolved the matter. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	United States v. Crepeau, No. 06-1099, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, February 5, 2007, Filed View this case - free   Overview: Defendant's conviction and sentence were affirmed because his guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered and complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 in every way, the district court correctly applied USSG § 2A6.1(b)(2) because defendant admitted to making more than two threats, and nothing suggested that the sentence was unreasonable. 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   CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.