 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dean v. Okla. Dep't of Corr., No. 06-5150,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A COA was denied and a state prisoner's appeal was dismissed because after review, the court concluded that the district court applied the proper precedent in reviewing the state court's disposition of petitioner's appeal and that its resolution of his claims was not reasonably debatable.
|
|||||
| Gaston v. Ploeger, No. 05-3461,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a § 1983 action stemming from an inmate's suicide, denial of motion for summary judgment sought by jail officer was reversed because there was no evidence that officer considered inmate suicidal. Thus, under the Fourteenth Amendment, he could not have been deliberately indifferent to the risk of suicide. He was entitled to qualified immunity.
|
|||||
| Gauthier v. Higgins, No. 06-7102,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A COA was denied because no reasonable jurist could have debated the denial of a prisoner's habeas petition based on findings that the prisoner had no expectation of being held in a certain facility, that he was not entitled to a hearing prior to his classification reduction, and that he did not show "but-for" causation on his claim of retaliation.
|
|||||
| Trammell v. McKune, No. 06-3316,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of § 2254 habeas corpus relief for defendant, who was convicted of felony theft and other crimes, was vacated because the prosecution's failure to disclose credit card receipts violated defendant's due process rights under Brady since the receipts were material to defendant's contention that another man committed the crimes and framed him.
|
|||||
| United States v. Galaz-Felix, No. 06-4100,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not commit clear error when it imposed the leader/organizer enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 where the evidence of the intercepted phone conversations was sufficient to show that defendant controlled or supervised several individuals, and there was evidence that defendant kept the organization's records and its money.
|
|||||
| United States v. Novosel, No. 06-3251,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal waiver in plea agreement was enforced under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 where since the parties modified the executory plea agreement prior to the court's acceptance of defendant's guilty plea, and there was no detrimental reliance that bound the government to the plea agreement before entry of the plea, the pre-existing duty rule was inapplicable.
|
|||||
| United States v. Shields, No. 06-3309,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 24-month sentence for violating conditions of his supervised release was affirmed because a sentence above the USSG Chapter 7 range was not a "departure," defendant was no entitled to notice of the sentence, and the district court offered a lengthy explanation for its decision, meeting the reasoned and reasonable standard.
|
|||||
| Thompson v. Janecka, No. 06-2240,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Inmate was not entitled to a COA, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 2253(c)(1)(A), to allow appeal from denial of his 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 petition because three of his challenges were not reviewable, and inmate's counsel was not ineffective for refusing to mount a wholly irrelevant defense to burglary based on inmate's personal relationship with the victim.
|
|||||
| United States v. McIntosh, No. 06-7059,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err during defendant's trial on charges that he committed assault resulting in serious bodily injury, in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 1153 and 113(a)(6), when it allowed his daughter and two other witnesses to testify that he assaulted his daughter on a prior occasion because testimony was relevant to show defendant's intent.
|
|||||
| United States v. Montalvo-Maldonado, No. 06-4302,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT, April 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Government's motion to enforce defendant's appeal waiver under United States v. Hahn was granted because defendant's only argument was that a miscarriage of justice would occur if the appeal was dismissed because of his lengthy sentence of 30 months. Sentencing objections did not establish that enforcement of the appeal waiver would be unlawful.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
