 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Krizanovic, No. 05-4354,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 46 month sentence, imposed at the bottom of his properly calculated USSG range, and after district court considered the factors in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a), was reasonable. District court's failure to grant a downward departure was not reviewable because there was no indication in the record that district court misunderstood its authority.
|
|||||
| United States v. Morrison, No. 05-4701,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a district court considered the policy statement on revocation contained in U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual ch. 7 prior to imposing sentence and imposed the thirty-month sentence so defendant could have received the intensive substance abuse treatment he clearly needed and requested, the sentence did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
|
|||||
| United States v. Nipper, No. 05-4628,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction and sentence were affirmed where defendant's argument, that his sentence violated Booker because his sentence was enhanced based upon his qualifying prior convictions, was foreclosed by existing U.S. Supreme Court precedent on prior convictions and appellate court was not free to overrule or ignore Supreme Court's precedents.
|
|||||
| United States v. Parris, No. 04-4737,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Puryear, No. 04-4541, No. 04-4546, No. 04-4547,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants' sentences were vacated and remanded where sentences, based on facts found by district court at sentencing, violated Sixth Amendment because district court sentenced defendants under mandatory federal sentencing guidelines and established a total offense level, and resulting guideline ranges exceeded those authorized by admitted conduct.
|
|||||
| United States v. Sherman, No. 04-4933,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: U.S.'s evidence supported defendant's conviction of unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1), and possession of cocaine, 21 U.S.C.S. § 844(a), where, inter alia, numerous witnesses testified that defendant produced a gun, and officer saw a small plastic bag containing cocaine protruding from defendant's pocket.
|
|||||
| United States v. Williams, No. 05-4551,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 1, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was reasonable where district court (1) properly calculated the guideline range and appropriately treated the USSG as advisory, (2) sentenced defendant only after considering and examining the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a), and (3) sentenced defendant within the applicable guideline range and the statutory maximum.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
