 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| CP v. Leon County Sch. Bd., No. 05-15769,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In an IDEA case, a district court's entry of final judgment in favor of a school board was affirmed since it was not obligated to implement an alternative placement and abandon the stay-put IEP as the stay-put provision had been invoked by the student and the partied had not agreed to an interim placement alternative.
|
|||||
| De Enjoy v. United States AG, No. 06-15454 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: That part of an alien's petition for review addressing the BIA's final removal order was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction since the petition was untimely, and the petition was denied as to the BIA's denial of a motion for reconsideration since the alien had abandoned that claim on appeal.
|
|||||
| Dennis v. United States DOJ, No. 06-14395 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed Bivens suit alleging that parole officers unlawfully detained inmate; suit was barred where claims implicated federal criminal proceedings which had not been invalidated, and suit was time barred under Alabama's two-year statute of limitations where it was filed six years after events of which inmate complained.
|
|||||
| Harden v. Yates, No. 06-12472 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's dismissal of a pro se federal inmate's 28 U.S.C.S. § 2241 petition because he failed to satisfy the savings clause on 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 was affirmed since the inmate's sentencing argument based on the Cotton decision was actually based on the Apprendi decision, which was not a retroactively applicable decision.
|
|||||
| Harris v. United States, No. 06-16576 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a FTCA case, a district court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the United States was affirmed because the district court correctly determined that, under Georgia landlord-tenant law, there was superior knowledge on the tenant's part regarding allegedly defective carpeting on the stairs.
|
|||||
| United States v. Brown, No. 05-11910 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Absent defendants' removal of the intent issue, prior drug convictions of possession with intent to sell drugs were probative under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) to show intent on the charges of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute drugs; the convictions were affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Dickerson, No. 06-13445 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant waited until his trial for violating 21 U.S.C.S. § 856(a)(2) was almost over to offer evidence, which was readily available, to impeach testimony of federal agent as to defendant's presence at drug sale, the district court, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(d)(2)(C), had authority to bar defendant from introducing that evidence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hayes, No. 05-15136 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Henry, No. 06-14975 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, April 10, 2007, Decided , April 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Violations of Sixth Amendment confrontation rights were harmless because police report recounting informant's statement that defendant lived at residence where drugs were found and sold drugs was cumulative and of little importance to government's case. The report was admitted into evidence but its contents were not brought to the jury's attention.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
