 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Chang-Gan Lin v. Keisler, No. 04-0882-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner, a native and citizen of China, was not per se eligible for asylum based on the persecution his parents suffered. Moreover, he was unable to show that he was personally persecuted. Although petitioner might have been treated unfairly in elementary school, this mistreatment did not amount to persecution.
|
|||||
| Liong v. Keisler, 07-0598-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying alien's untimely motion to reopen based on her claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. BIA properly found alien did not establish prejudice as to pretermission of her asylum claim pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1158(a)(2) because, in her motion, she made same arguments that IJ and BIA previously rejected.
|
|||||
| Martinez v. Kelly, No. 05-4714-pr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While statistics alone could establish prima facie case in certain circumstances, state court did not unreasonably apply federal law in concluding that prosecution's striking three of four prospective black jurors was not sufficient pattern of strikes to draw inference of discrimination, at least not at that early point in jury selection process.
|
|||||
| Patton v. Democrat Town Comm. of Willington, No. 07-4617-cv,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of preliminary injunctive relief was affirmed. Even if minor political party members' allegation of constitutional injury from ballot appearance of cross-endorsed candidates on two party lines stated irreparable injury, district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that the members failed to demonstrate likely success on the claim.
|
|||||
| Poramba-Liyanage v. Bureau of Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 06-2488-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As alien's ineffective assistance claim failed at threshold stage--he failed to demonstrate that competent counsel would have acted differently in advising him--it was not abuse of discretion for IJ, affirmed by BIA, to deny alien's motion to reopen. Counsel explained that alien's asylum claim was weak and voluntary departure was his best option.
|
|||||
| Santhiramowleesan v. Keisler, 06-0069-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(4)(B), an IJ's adverse credibility determination regarding a Sri Lankan asylum applicant was not supported by substantial evidence. The court remanded matter where IJ improperly found that the applicant's testimony contained several inconsistencies, but court noted that most of the inconsistencies were minor and isolated.
|
|||||
| United States v. Brown, 06-3657-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The district court calculated the appropriate USSG range; clearly listened to defendant's arguments for downward departure; explained what factors she was considering in determining her sentence; recognized that USSG were not mandatory, but that she had to take them into consideration; and imposed a sentence well below the mandatory minimum.
|
|||||
| United States v. DiMaio, No. 06-0619-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's failure to explicitly consider whether defendant was similarly situated with codefendants and any potential disparity between their sentences was not error. 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) did not require courts to consider sentencing disparity among co-defendants, as primary purpose of § 3553(a)(6) was to minimize nationwide disparities.
|
|||||
| United States v. McLaughlin, No. 06-1200-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 6, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even if defendant's statement was a confession for purposes of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3501, district court did not err by failing to instruct jury on voluntariness as that issue was never raised at trial; moreover, any error in failing to instruct jury on voluntariness would not have been prejudicial, as government made limited use of statement at trial.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
