 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Edwards, No. 05-8085,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A taxpayer was required to pay the government damages, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 38, because the results of the government's petition to enforce an IRS summons were obvious and his arguments on appeal, which did not attempt to address the Powell factors, were wholly without merit.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ramirez-Marin, No. 05-4150,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence for illegal reentry was properly enhanced for a prior aggravated felony conviction because controlling U.S. Supreme Court precedent held that 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(b)(2) merely created a sentencing factor that did not need to be alleged in the indictment.
|
|||||
| United States v. Roman-Roman, No. 03-3276,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Following remand from the United States Supreme Court, defendant's conviction and sentence were affirmed because, even though the district court committed non-constitutional Booker error, defendant failed to show anything in the record to indicate what specific factors would result in the district court imposing a lower sentence on remand.
|
|||||
| Woodberry v. McKune, No. 05-3304,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if prisoner's Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion was not successive petition on basis it asserted defect in integrity of 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 proceeding, motion was dismissed. Claim government used unsubstantiated facts to allow district court to apply erroneous procedural bar did not state fraud with particularity as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b).
|
|||||
| Woodberry v. McKune, No. 05-3255,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, March 27, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Not only was a pro se state inmate's appeal dismissed in his habeas corpus proceeding, but the appellate court imposed restrictions on the inmate's access to the courts because in five years he had filed 22 appeals with the present court, which had been dismissed not only as being wholly without merit, but also legally frivolous.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
