 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Jones, No. 05-4186,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even assuming, without deciding, that the plain error standard applied, defendant's sentence under the then-mandatory USSG was in error because district court announced a lower alternate sentence of five months that it might have imposed on defendant had it not been under the now-erroneous understanding that application of the USSG was mandatory.
|
|||||
| United States v. McClelland, No. 05-4352,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court could not have concluded that defendant's 57-month sentence was unreasonable where district court sentenced defendant only after considering and examining USSG and factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a), as instructed by Booker, and sentenced defendant at bottom of applicable guideline range and well within statutory maximum.
|
|||||
| United States v. Mosley, No. 05-4357,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence did not violate the Sixth Amendment where the district court's determination that defendant was an armed career criminal, within the meaning of USSG § 4B1.4, did not violate the Sixth Amendment because defendant did not contest any facts about his prior convictions used to arrive at the armed career criminal designation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Nowell, No. 05-4340,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Scinto, No. 05-6713,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Valladares, No. 04-4292,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
