 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Cantu, No. 06-14194 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided , April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's guilty plea conviction for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) was affirmed as he was not seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment since a police officer was justified in stopping a commercial truck for a traffic violation and it was reasonable for the officer to question defendant's authorization to be a passenger.
|
|||||
| United States v. Daniels, No. 06-11246 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided , April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for conspiracy to import into the United States five kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.S. §§ 952, 960(b)(1)(B)(ii), and 963 was affirmed since the invited error doctrine prevented appellate review of his claim that the district court did not comply with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, and his sentence was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Madden, No. 06-12827 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided , April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 53-month sentence on drug charges was vacated, and the case was remanded because, inter alia, the district court considered factors unrelated to defendant's substantial assistance in determining how much to depart under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5K1.1.
|
|||||
| United States v. Mancilla, No. 05-16325 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided , April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court violated Jones rule by not eliciting fully articulated objections to sentence or manner in which it was pronounced after it imposed sentence. Record did not allow meaningful appellate review since objection asserted--that government breached plea agreement by failing to inform court of cooperation--was not mentioned during sentencing hearing.
|
|||||
| United States v. Moton, No. 06-14435 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided , April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's imposition of a 160-month sentence for possession of counterfeit currency and conspiring to pass such currency under 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 371, 472, was not plain error because the court applied a variance rather than an upward departure under USSG § 4A.1.3(a)(4)(B), and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(h)'s advance notice requirement did not apply.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ortiz-Williams, No. 06-14770 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided , April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction and sentence for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(a) and (b)(2) were affirmed since, pursuant to the Almendarez-Torres decision, the district court did not err in sentencing defendant based on his prior conviction for an aggravated felony, and the sentence did not implicate or violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
|
|||||
| Webster v. Beary, No. 06-12194,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 4, 2007, Decided , April 4, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a § 1983 suit, an excessive force claim was properly dismissed against sheriff deputies who shot a driver during an arrest at a gas station; the deputies had an objectively reasonable belief that the driver's throwing his car suddenly into reverse threatened the life of one deputy and, thus, were entitled to qualified immunity for their actions.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
