 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Conaway v. United States, No. 05-14969 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because district court failed to address adequately inmate's claim that his counsel was ineffective for failing to advise him that he could seek to enter conditional guilty plea while reserving right to appeal district court's suppression ruling under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(a)(2), case was remanded to district court for consideration of that issue.
|
|||||
| Lattimore v. United States, No. 05-12148 Non-Argument Calendar,,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's denial of an inmate's 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 motion was vacated, and the case was remanded because the appellate court was not satisfied that the inmate knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to claim that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance during sentencing.
|
|||||
| Royal Surplus Lines Ins. Co. v. Coachman Indus., No. 05-11247,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurer waived its rights to claim that insureds breached contract by failing to disclose certain information that increased their liability for products liability claims; insurer paid settlement without reserving right to deny coverage, as was required under Fla. Stat. § 627.426(2)(a) because insurer was aware of information prior to settlement.
|
|||||
| Shao v. United States AG, No. 05-15013 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien's petition for review following the denial of her application for relief, withholding of removal and CAT relief was denied because the IJ's adverse credibility finding was supported by substantial evidence, and nothing in the record compelled reversal of that decision.
|
|||||
| Simpson v. Holder, No. 05-15623 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A prisoner's FTCA claims were properly dismissed with prejudice. United States was only proper defendant in suit under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2679(a), (b). Prisoner had not filed administrative claim regarding BOP employees' conduct as required by 28 U.S.C.S. § 2675(a). United States was not liable for hospital employees' conduct under 28 U.S.C.S. § 2671.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hernandez, No. 05-15615 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Longo, No. 05-16201 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was properly enhanced under USSG § 2B1.1(b) because employee benefit plan participants were properly counted as victims where they each owned pro rata share of plan assets, the embezzlement scheme as a whole involved sophisticated means, and defendant violated securities laws and was a person associated with investment advisor.
|
|||||
| United States v. Powerstein, No. 05-15144 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly entered an order barring a former inmate from filing any more pleadings or documents in his postconviction action challenging his sentence; former inmate had filed more than 40 pleadings and 15 appeals in the case since completing his sentence, and the district court afforded him due process before issuing the injunction.
|
|||||
| United States v. Rodriquez, No. 05-14833 Non-Argument Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, June 19, 2006, Decided , June 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 92-month sentence for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1) was affirmed because he waived his right to challenge the USSG under the Constitution, and the district court did not err in enhancing his sentence under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §§ 2K2.1(b)(5) and 3A1.2(b)(1).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
