 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dube v. J.P. Morgan Investor Servs., No. 05-2487,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for an employer was affirmed in an employee's action under ERISA and the FMLA because there was no abuse of discretion in the district court's refusal to award a statutory penalty pursuant to 29 U.S.C.S. § 1132(c)(1)(B), and the employer gave the employee the full 12 weeks, and more, of FMLA leave to which he was entitled.
|
|||||
| United States v. Anziani, No. 05-2165,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 121-month sentence for his participation in a heroin-trafficking conspiracy was affirmed because the district court's explanation for the sentence was adequate under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a).
|
|||||
| United States v. Gonzalez-Velez, No. 05-1184, No. 05-1758,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Jury instructions and special verdict form were proper which required findings as to the guilt of each defendant and which gave directions to find a conspiracy-wide amount of cocaine that posed no risk that the jury would fail to find an element of the offense that increased the statutory maximum penalty nor created Apprendi or Blakely error.
|
|||||
| United States v. Malouf, No. 05-2245,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction for violating 21 U.S.C.S. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 was remanded for sentencing because, upon finding by preponderance of the evidence that defendant was accountable for more than 500 grams of cocaine, ten-year mandatory minimum sentence under 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(B)(1)(b) applied. The amount did not have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
|
|||||
| Clarke v. Gonzales, No. 06-1372,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner's challenge to the constitutionality of the application of the IIRIRA to him based on the date that he was charged with removability was foreclosed by the court's earlier decisions.
|
|||||
| Evans v. Verdini, No. 05-2272,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT, October 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's denial of a inmate's petition for habeas corpus was affirmed because, at trial, the defense opened the door for the prosecution to impeach a prosecution witness's testimony that he never saw the inmate with a gun on the date of the murder. Thus, there was no evidentiary violation, much less a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
