 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Arshad v. Gonzales, No. 05-1985,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(4)(B), an alien's application for asylum and withholding of removal based on persecution by Sunni Muslims was properly denied because substantial evidence supported the BIA's findings that the alien failed to show that the Pakistani government was unwilling and unable to control the extremist groups.
|
|||||
| Laber v. Harvey, No. 04-2132,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: United States Court of Appeals for Fourth Circuit overruled Pecker and Morris and held that federal-employee who prevailed before Office of Federal Operations on issue of liability but who was unsatisfied with OFO's remedy had to place employing agency's discrimination at issue in order to claim entitlement to more favorable remedial award.
|
|||||
| Olwoch v. Gonzales, No. 05-1272, No. 05-1898,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review from BIA's order affirming denial of cancellation of removal was denied, as substantial evidence supported finding that alien gave false testimony for purpose of obtaining immigration benefit such that she was barred by 8 U.S.C.S. § 1101(f)(6) from establishing requisite moral character necessary for cancellation of removal.
|
|||||
| Richardson v. Powel, No. 05-2131,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Rubendall v. Thompson, No. 05-2023,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Brown, No. 03-4820,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was affirmed because the record as a whole provided no nonspeculative basis for concluding that the treatment of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual as mandatory affected the district court's selection of the sentence imposed; thus, the error did not affect defendant's substantial rights.
|
|||||
| United States v. O'Quinn, No. 05-6412,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, February 16, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An inmate's petition for 28 U.S.C.S. § 2255 relief, which arose from alleged ineffective assistance of counsel due to a failure to inform about a corrected plea agreement, was improperly denied without an evidentiary hearing because the record was not clear that the inmate was not entitled to relief since a credibility determination was needed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
