 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Caputo v. Nelson, No. 06-1117,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of habeas petition was affirmed because, applying AEDPA, the court agreed that suspect was not subjected to functional equivalent of interrogation, and his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination was not violated, when police officer made telephone call in suspect's presence describing what he had found at suspect's home.
|
|||||
| United States v. Thurston, No. 05-2271,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 26, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentence of three months' imprisonment and 24 months' supervised release for conspiring to defraud Medicare of over $ 5,000,000 was vacated because sentence was 95% below the incarceration period recommended by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, and the justification for the disparity, based on the factors in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a), was insufficient.
|
|||||
| P.R. Ports Auth. v. Umpierre-Solares, No. 05-1637,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court had admiralty jurisdiction over a port authority's breach-of-contract action where the contract involved the removal of vessel at the bottom of the harbor that was obstructing navigation. The action was barred by laches because the port authority's 11-year delay in seeking specific performance to re-sink the ship was unreasonable.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ayala-Lopez, No. 06-1640,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal was allowed to proceed without determination as to whether order, denying defendant's motion to strike 18 U.S.C.S. § 3593(a) notice, was subject to interlocutory appeal. Defendant's claim, that notice of intent to seek death penalty was not timely served, lacked merit. Notice made technical corrections to earlier, timely notice.
|
|||||
| Esso Std. Oil Co. v. Rodriguez-Perez, No. 05-1722,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, July 28, 2006, Entered
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Hotel Assocs. v. Howard Johnson Franchise Sys., No. 05-1944,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, August 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under a contract, licensee was required to notify licensor of change in ownership of licensee's chain hotel; although licensee corporation's sole shareholder was same person who was sole shareholder of corporation that sold hotel to licensee, because corporations were separate entities apart from their shareholders, change in ownership took place.
|
|||||
| United States v. Burks, No. 05-2075,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, August 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted on drug charges, his 120-month sentence was reasonable because, inter alia, the district court took into consideration his participation in education programs during his incarceration and his family ties, and the Sixth Amendment did not require the fact and nature of prior state convictions to be proved to a jury.
|
|||||
| United States v. Santiago-Salazar, No. 05-2444,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, August 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of a minor-role adjustment under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.2 was affirmed as the facts indicated that defendant was in charge of an illicit transaction because he not only orchestrated the shipment of cocaine-filled suitcase but had follow-up conversations and meetings with a confidential source to determine status of suitcase.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
