 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Apodaca v. Sec'y of the Dep't of Homeland Sec., No. 05-12750 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2006, Decided , January 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Federal employer was entitled to summary judgment as to employee's discrimination and retaliation claims under ADEA and Title VII because none of employee's allegations regarding evaluations, a request to maintain a second office. or new hiring policies materially altered terms or conditions of employment so as to show an adverse employment action.
|
|||||
| Camara v. Brinker Int'l, No. 05-11226 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2006, Decided , January 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In Title VII gender discrimination case, district court did not err in denying employee's motion to compel more discovery to show that similarly situated male employees were treated less harshly; even if employee had been allowed more discovery, it would not have rebutted legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason employer offered for discharging her.
|
|||||
| United States v. Florez, No. 05-10771 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2006, Decided , January 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court vacated 36-month sentence that defendant received for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(a), (b)(1); district court erred in failing to give defendant notice, as required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(h), that it intended to make upward departure from applicable guidelines range where presentence investigation report recommended an 8 to 14-month sentence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gray, No. 05-10137 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2006, Decided , January 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion by denying defendant's motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence under Fed. R. Crim. P. 33 because defendant did not show that the newly-discovered evidence was anything more than impeaching a government informant.
|
|||||
| United States v. Martinez, No. 05-12706 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2006, Decided , January 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After Booker, court had jurisdiction to review reasonableness of defendant's 87-month sentence for illegal reentry because unreasonable sentence was one imposed in violation of the law within meaning of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3742; sentence was reasonable under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors where it was within range and prior convictions involved violence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Salvia, No. 04-16665 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2006, Decided , January 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the presentence report stated that 18 U.S.C.S. § 3663A and USSG § 2B1.1 required restitution and defendant had acknowledged restitution had to be ordered, but deferred on the amount, the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 error in not informing him of the court's ability to impose restitution was not plain error requiring reversal.
|
|||||
| United States v. Sanders, No. 05-10255 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 9, 2006, Decided , January 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Government was properly allowed to rehabilitate victim's testimony by introducing in firearm possession trial a photographic lineup and victim's prior identification of defendant; there was no plain error in failing to conduct in camera hearing where defendant did not request one and there was no showing of unusual or extraordinary circumstances.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
