 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| United States v. Cousin, No. 05-3454,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal, which challenged his 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1) conviction and sentence, was denied as frivolous. Suppression motion was properly denied because officers had probable cause to arrest and search defendant. District court properly adopted enhancements under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §§ 2d1.1(b)(1), 4A1.1(c), 4A1.2(d)(2)(B).
|
|||||
| United States v. Midgley, No. 05-5019,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Against the backdrop of a detailed description recounting how defendant decided to shoot his girlfriend and then shot her, and considering that the district court sentenced defendant below the guidelines range, the application of a 16-level enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A) was not a miscarriage of justice.
|
|||||
| United States v. Redding, No. 06-1698,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, March 2, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Considering the substantial time period covered and number of transactions - defendant deposited approximately 100 checks payable to his employer - demonstrated that defendant's conduct was not purely opportune and a two-level increase for more than minimal planning under former U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2F1.1 was appropriate.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
