 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Amador, No. 05-4934,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B) motion to withdraw guilty plea. Although at time he entered plea defendant was unaware that government would later indict him for racketeering, plea was intelligently made, defendant never claimed legal innocence, and he had close assistance of counsel.
|
|||||
| United States v. Parker, No. 05-4488,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction for conspiring to make false statements in connection with the sale and acquisition of firearms was upheld since suppression of a weapon recovered at defendant's prior residence was properly denied as the government notified him upon its acquisition of the weapon, as required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 16, and offered to reschedule the trial.
|
|||||
| United States v. Sherrod, No. 05-5103,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in denying a defendant's motion for acquittal under Fed. R. Crim. P. 29 because there was sufficient evidence to support his crack cocaine and cocaine conspiracy convictions; the jury weighed the credibility of the witnesses, choosing to believe them, and the jury decided which interpretation of the evidence to believe.
|
|||||
| United States v. Simpson, No. 05-5155,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While district court erred in not ensuring compliance with 28 U.S.C.S. § 753, there was no evidence that omission of single bench conference rendered trial transcript so inadequate as to make defendant's substantive assignments of error unreviewable; thus defendant did not establish that omission prejudiced his ability to effect meaningful appeal.
|
|||||
| West Virginia v. Thompson, No. 03-1841,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Secretary of Health and Human Services did not act arbitrarily or capriciously, or interpret 42 U.S.C.S. § 1396p(b)(3) unreasonably when he disapproved State's proposed undue hardship waiver; State's waiver was so broad that it would serve not as exception to estate recovery for hardship cases but as means of unraveling estate recovery mandate.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
