 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Vivas-Rengefo, No. 05-10882 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Decided , February 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's judgment that defendant was not entitled to a U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.2(b) minor-role reduction after defendant pled guilty to violating 46 U.S.C.S. app. § 1903(a), (g), and (j), and 21 U.S.C.S. § 960(b)(1)(B)(ii) was affirmed because defendant failed to carry his burden on the first prong of the De Varon test.
|
|||||
| Usher v. Mortin, No. 05-13859 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Decided , February 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to jury array on grounds it was not a fair cross-section of community, as percentage of blacks on jury list reflected percentage of blacks 18 years and older in county at the time, within a margin of .03 percent, and there was no evidence that blacks were systematically excluded from the jury list.
|
|||||
| Zabriskie v. Court Admin., No. 04-16103 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 1, 2006, Decided , February 1, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed a citizen's claims against state court employees for money damages as they were barred by Eleventh Amendment immunity. Further, the district court properly granted the employees summary judgment on the citizen's claims for injunctive relief as the employees did not violate the citizen's Fourteenth Amendment rights.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
