 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Boydston v. Isom, No. 06-2146,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals affirmed district court's judgment dismissing action which a business owner filed against police officers under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983, alleging that they initiated a malicious prosecution, because a reasonable officer would have concluded that owner violated state law when he refused to show officers records he was required to keep.
|
|||||
| Clark v. Uchtman, No. 06-2300,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate failed to make a prima facie showing that the successive petition satisfied the requirements of 28 U.S.C.S. § 2244(b)(2) where he invoked no new rule of constitutional law made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the U.S. Supreme Court, did not rely on any newly discovered evidence, and his allegations of innocence were conclusory.
|
|||||
| McGee v. Terrell, No. 06-3220,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of the inmate's habeas petition was affirmed where the district court correctly held that claims challenging the legality of a sentence were the province of a § 2255 petition, not a § 2241 petition, and the inmate had not provided any factual allegations suggesting that a § 2255 petition provided an inadequate remedy for his claims.
|
|||||
| Ochoa v. Sirmons, No. 06-6349,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals granted a state inmate's request to file a second petition for a writ of habeas corpus because he met the conditions specified in 28 U.S.C.S. § 2244(b)(2)(A) by claiming that he was mentally retarded and ineligible for the death penalty under the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Atkins v. Virginia.
|
|||||
| United States v. Cole, No. 06-3072,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not violate defendant's rights when it used facts he admitted when he pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1), to find that base offense level was subject to four-level enhancement under USSG § 2K2.1 because he used the firearm to commit aggravated assault under Kansas law.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
