 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Byrd v. United States, No. 05-7981,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lynch v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., No. 05-1396,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Malone v. Lamanna, No. 05-7865,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Salt Inst. v. Leavitt, No. 05-1097,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The dismissal of a suit seeking disclosure of findings funded by an agency was affirmed because the Information Quality Act, 44 U.S.C.S. § 3516, did not create a legal right to access to information, and thus organizations did not allege an invasion of a legal right and failed to establish an injury in fact sufficient to satisfy Article III.
|
|||||
| Spencer v. Williams, No. 05-7868,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Caldwell, No. 05-4869,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence upon revocation of his supervised release was affirmed where the sentence was reasonable and the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing it because, inter alia, the sentence was within both the statutory and guideline range, under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 7B1.4(a).
|
|||||
| United States v. Carter, No. 05-7675,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Castillo, No. 04-4827,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was affirmed where appellate court declined to address issue of ineffectiveness of counsel, in violation of Sixth Amendment, because, while defendant asserted that sentence was result of denial of assistance of counsel during his testimony at codefendant's trial, there was no conclusive evidence of ineffectiveness of counsel.
|
|||||
| United States v. Davis, No. 05-7898,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 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. |
