 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Lemos Vasquez, No. 06-13466 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's concurrent 135-month sentences for violating 46 U.S.C.S. app. § 1903(a), (g), and (j) (current versions at 46 U.S.C.S. §§ 70503(a) and 70506) and 21 U.S.C.S. § 960(b)(1)(B)(ii) were affirmed since the district court did not err in not reducing his offense level by two levels pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.2(b).
|
|||||
| United States v. McClymont, No. 06-10515 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: One defendant's conviction and for violating 46 U.S.C.S. app. § 1903(a) and (j) (current versions at 46 U.S.C.S. §§ 70503(a) and 70506) was affirmed as the district court did not err in not setting aside its ruling on a dismissal motion. A second defendant's conviction was affirmed as the district court did not err in denying his dismissal motion.
|
|||||
| United States v. Moody, No. 06-15114 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 180-month sentence for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1) was affirmed since the district court did not err in treating his 1982 conviction for third-degree burglary, in violation of Ala. Code § 13A-7-7, as a qualifying conviction for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(e).
|
|||||
| United States v. Soto, No. 06-12945 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Nine month consecutive sentences for violating 21 U.S.C.S. § 841 and 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c) were vacated, and the case was remanded for resentencing since, inter alia, in imposing the drug sentence the district court departed under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5K1.1 based upon factors unrelated to defendant's substantial assistance.
|
|||||
| United States v. Woods, No. 05-15999 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for violating 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1) was affirmed since the district court did not err in denying his motion to suppress and there was sufficient evidence to show intent to distribute. Defendant's 262-month sentence was affirmed because, inter alia, his criminal history was correctly calculated.
|
|||||
| Valescot v. United States AG, No. 06-14141 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The aliens' petition for review was denied because substantial evidence supported the finding that the husband, who had been a former member of the Haitian police, did not suffer persecution on account of imputed political opinion or membership in a particular social group.
|
|||||
| Williams v. Bd. of Regents, No. 04-13800,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 9, 2007, Decided , February 9, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Title IX complaint filed by co-ed who was gang-raped by three basketball players adequately stated claim for failure to supervise because university coaches and athletic association had actual knowledge that instigator had been expelled from other schools for similar conduct; co-ed lacked standing for injunctive relief because she had dropped out.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
