 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dingle v. Sec'y for the Dep't of Corr., No. 05-13408,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 8, 2007, Decided , March 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of a 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 petition was affirmed because petitioner did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel; by not calling any witnesses to the stand, counsel not only could focus more on intent than on causation, but he also retained the distinct advantage of presenting both the initial and concluding closing argument to the jury.
|
|||||
| Enax v. United States, No. 06-14774 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 8, 2007, Decided , March 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's dismissal of federal taxpayer's claims against the IRS was affirmed since his claim that the IRS's revocations of the certificates of release of its tax liens were time-barred concerned the collection of taxes, and 26 U.S.C.S. § 7421 prohibited such actions, and it did not appear that the revocations were time-barred.
|
|||||
| United States v. Demetz, No. 05-12885,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 8, 2007, Decided , March 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction and 108-month sentence for violating 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 2, 371, 1343, 1956(h), and 1957 were affirmed because his four arguments on appeal, which included an assertion that his sentence was unreasonable under the Booker decision, had no merit.
|
|||||
| United States v. McKinney, No. 05-14168,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 8, 2007, Decided , March 8, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
