 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Mouliert-Vidal v. Flores-Galarza, No. 04-1665,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly denied a Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f) to depose a witness as there was no showing that the deposition would have influenced the outcome of the summary judgment motion, properly treated the summary judgment motion as unopposed given plaintiffs' blatant disregard for deadlines, and appropriately ruled on the motion.
|
|||||
| Olmeda v. Ortiz-Quinonez, No. 04-2596,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A Puerto Rico Planning Board employee was not federally protected against political discrimination and her First Amendment claim against Board officials was barred by qualified immunity because her job description made clear that she was involved in policymaking through analyzing and making recommendations on projects.
|
|||||
| United States v. Duran, No. 04-2450,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction was affirmed because jurisdiction was proper given facts showing that the drugs were to be sold in Maine, many claims were waived, there was a factual basis for defendant's plea, his claim of ineffective legal assistance was premature; all criteria for sentencing him as a career offender were met, but the Booker error was not harmless.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hall, No. 03-2425,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While sufficient evidence supported money laundering and drug conspiracy convictions, defendant was granted resentencing because a district court's unease with the degree of speculation in a drug quantity calculation and recognition of his difficult childhood showed that it may have imposed a more favorable sentence under the advisory guidelines.
|
|||||
| United States v. Mojica-Rivera, No. 01-2335,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The appellate court rejected defendant's argument that he should have been resentenced pursuant to Booker because defendant failed to show that there was a reasonable probability that the district court would have given him a more favorable sentence on a remand.
|
|||||
| United States v. Vongkaysone, No. 05-1163,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 12, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Police officers had probable cause to arrest defendant because he was one of two persons described by an informant who was to arrive to sell the informant drugs at the arranged time and place; the sweep of the vehicle, seizure of the bag containing the drugs, and search of defendant and seizure of currency were valid incident to the arrest.
|
|||||
| Arrieta-Colon v. Wal-Mart P.R., Inc., Nos. 04-2614; 04-2615,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a former employee was constantly harassed by co-workers due to a penile implant that left him with the appearance of a constant semi-erection, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that there was a hostile work environment under the ADA, 42 U.S.C.S. § 12101 et seq., that reasonably led to a constructive discharge.
|
|||||
| Torres-Arroyo v. Rullan, No. 03-2722,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion under Fed. R. Evid. 403 when it sought to minimize jury confusion by summarizing the contents of the documents from the previous case in lieu of allowing their introduction as full exhibits.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hansen, Nos. 03-1331, 05-1414,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, January 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals rejected defendant's argument that Government violated his right to be free from double jeopardy when it charged him with violating 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 924 and 1951(a) for his role in an armed robbery of an armored car, and it upheld his conviction and sentence for using a firearm during a crime of violence, thereby causing a murder.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
