 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Benitez, No. 05-12413 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided , January 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Fed. R. Civ P. 60(b) motion was denied as the district court had no jurisdiction to consider the motion, which, in fact, was a second or successive 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion because defendant did not obtain authorization from the circuit court to file a second or successive § 2255 motion under 28 U.S.C.S. §§ 2244(b)(3)(A) and 2255.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gonzalez-Lauzan, No. 04-12536,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided , January 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where officers, before giving the defendant his Miranda rights, outlined to him their case against him, telling him to listen, and without asking the defendant any questions, the defendant's subsequent waiver of his Miranda rights was voluntary and valid under the Fifth Amendment, and his post-Miranda statements were properly admitted.
|
|||||
| United States v. Oloruntoba, No. 05-12376 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided , January 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence for possession of and importing heroin was affirmed because he was not entitled to a minor-role reduction under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §3B1.2(b) since he offered no factual basis that his actual conduct was any different than the relevant conduct for which he was held accountable.
|
|||||
| United States v. Tush, No. 05-11231 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, January 30, 2006, Decided , January 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's controlled substances convictions were affirmed as defendant, under Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(e), waived his right to argue that his statements were inadmissible by not filing a motion to suppress. Further, his sentence was properly enhanced under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1(b)(1) due to his possession of a dangerous weapon.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
