 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cham v. AG of the United States, No. 04-4251,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien seeking asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under CAT was entitled to a second and a real chance to create a hearing record that comported with the requirements of due process based on the belligerence and wholesale nitpicking of testimony by the IJ.
|
|||||
| SEIU, Local 3 v. Municipality of Mt. Leb., NO. 04-4646,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals found that parts of the municipal code adopted by the Municipality of Mt. Lebanon (Pennsylvania) which required door-to-door canvassers who planned to distribute written material to residents to register with police violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it substantially burdened a broad range of speech.
|
|||||
| Shah v. AG of the United States, Nos. 04-3607 and 05-1122,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: IJ's finding that petitioner's father (who was an active member of Muttahia Qaumi Movement) was indeed alive was entirely unsupportable; pictures of petitioner's father lying in a pool of blood on the ground where he was shot appeared in newspaper articles about the murder in two newspapers. IJ failed to address, or even mention, these articles.
|
|||||
| Torisky v. Schweiker, NO. 05-1496,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals affirmed district court's judgment denying motion to dismiss claim that guardians of retarded adults filed against state officials, pursuant to 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983, because record did not show that Pennsylvania did not have a duty to protect the adults, pursuant to U.S. Const. amend. XIV, even though they were voluntarily committed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Joseph, No. 05-1413,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence of guilt on marijuana distribution and firearms charges under 21 U.S.C.S. 841(a)(1), and 18 U.S.C.S. 924(c) and 922(a)(6), was overwhelming, so admission of prior bad acts evidence about other drugs, even if constitutional error, was harmless. Prosecutor's improper closing comments were minimal and curative instruction cured any confusion.
|
|||||
| United States v. Rodriguez, No. 05-2466,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not commit clear error when it rejected Batson challenge because defendant failed to show that prosecutor's reasons for striking minority venirepersons were pretextual. Special supervised release condition, which required pre-approval for contact with husband, was properly imposed; husband had led defendant to commit the crimes.
|
|||||
| United States v. Seaton, Case No: 05-2209,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Fed. R. Crim. P. 29(c) motion for a judgment of acquittal was properly denied because United States presented sufficient evidence to support drug and firearm possession convictions. Defendant failed to show that his need for disclosure of informant's identity outweighed public's and informant's interest in keeping identity confidential.
|
|||||
| United States v. Skiba, No. 05-2436,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction was affirmed because district court took 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors into account in sentencing, specifically noting that offense was premeditated and that defendant brought in trigger man to kill victim for insurance monies and sentencing defendant within advisory guidelines range, and applied factors reasonably.
|
|||||
| United States v. Thomas, No. 05-4676,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, April 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), court dismissed inmate's appeal from dismissal of his § 2241 petition because inmate failed to show that scope or procedure offered by § 2255 would prevent inmate from having full hearing and adjudication of his claim and petition raised no claims that could not have been raised in § 2255 motion.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
