 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Chasse v. McCraney, No. 05-12920 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Decided , March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Juvenile probation specialist was not entitled to a qualified immunity defense in summary judgment on a mother's complaint against her. There were factual disputes as to whether the specialist's employment gave her the responsibility of notifying the mother as to the change of a custody hearing date.
|
|||||
| Dye v. Radcliff, No. 05-14742 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Decided , March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a § 1983 case arising from an individual being charged with armed trespass, a district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of a property owner was affirmed because the individual had failed to establish that the owner had conspired with state officials. There was no showing that the owner had acted under the color of state law.
|
|||||
| Garcia-Gonzalez v. United States AG, No. 05-14855 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence supported denial of alien's application for CAT relief and withholding of removal (8 U.S.C.S. § 1231); threatening telephone calls and single incident in which alien was hit several times with stick did not constitute persecution, and alien's father's beating occurred 10 years before alien applied for relief.
|
|||||
| Sierra Club v. Ga. Power Co., No. 05-11314,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Decided , March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a Clean Air Act citizen enforcement action, the entry of partial summary judgment that a power company could not assert as a defense the startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) Rule found in Georgia's State Implementation Plan and the plant's permit was reversed; Ga. Comp. R. & Regs. 391-3-1-.02(2)(a)7(i) was still in effect.
|
|||||
| United States v. Cantu, No. 05-14089 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction and sentence were affirmed because, even though the court committed Booker error by applying the USSG as mandatory, his substantial rights were not affected. His claims of ineffective assistance of counsel was dismissed because the record was not sufficiently developed with respect to those claims.
|
|||||
| United States v. Garza, No. 05-10233 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for violating 21 U.S.C.S. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B)(ii), and 846 and the district court's factual findings in connection with sentencing were affirmed, but the sentence was vacated, and the case was remanded for resentencing because the district court's Booker error in sentencing defendant was not harmless error.
|
|||||
| United States v. Grana, No. 05-12847 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Decided , March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction was affirmed. There was no error as to district court's limitations on defendant's cross-examination of government witnesses as defendant's cross-examination was adequate to protect his rights under Confrontation Clause and any alleged evidentiary error was harmless as ample evidence supported jury's guilty verdict.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hinestroza, No. 05-14576 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's brief and conclusory statement at his sentencing hearing was insufficient to raise the issue of a minor-role reduction under USSG § 3D1.2 and thus he was precluded from raising the issue on appeal. Even if the statement preserved the issue, it was axiomatic that the statement failed to meet defendant's burden required by DeVaron.
|
|||||
| United States v. Maldonado-Asencio, No. 05-15344 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, March 30, 2006, Decided , March 30, 2006, 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. |
