 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Chuculate v. Barnhart, No. 05-7045,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although two arguments of plaintiff were rejected, the court agreed that the vocational expert (VE) omitted an impairment in her response, and that the ALJ should have verified that the VE meant to identify jobs that plaintiff was able to do with the exact residual functional capacity the ALJ found plaintiff to have, and a remand was ordered.
|
|||||
| Gauthier v. Higgins, No. 05-5138,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A request for a COA under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(2) to challenge the dismissal of a habeas petition was denied because the petition was untimely under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2244(d) since an inmate's argument that the limitations period did not begin running until he was able to pay for the transcripts of his state court proceedings was rejected.
|
|||||
| Quick v. Mann, No. 05-7102,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The dismissal pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e) of an inmate's 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 complaint was affirmed because an inmate did not have a constitutional right to be housed with his son, despite his dependence on his son due to his blindness, and his other claims failed to implicate a warden's advisor or they were too vague and conclusory.
|
|||||
| United States v. Castano, No. 05-7040,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals found that defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal sentence of 211 months' imprisonment which district court imposed after he pled guilty to violating 21 U.S.C.S. § 846, 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1), and 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c)(1)(A), and it granted his counsel's motion to withdraw and dismissed defendant's appeal.
|
|||||
| United States v. Walton, No. 05-3414,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A request for a certificate of appealability pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(2) to challenge the denial of a 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion was denied because neither Blakely nor Booker applied retroactively to an inmate's case, which became final prior to the issuance of both decisions.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
