 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Menghesha v. Gonzales, No. 04-1716,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of petitioner alien's asylum application was vacated and remanded because the IJ erred in discontinuing his inquiry after identifying the Ethiopian government's arguably legitimate motive to prosecute the alien, instead of also considering the evidence of the government's political motive.
|
|||||
| Patten v. Signator Ins. Agency, Inc., No. 05-1148,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's motion to vacate an arbitration award was granted because the arbitrator disregarded the plain and unambiguous language of the governing arbitration agreement when he concluded that it included an implied one-year limitations period; in so doing, the arbitrator failed to draw his award from the essence of the agreement.
|
|||||
| United States v. Alvarado, No. 04-4969,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a federal criminal complaint was filed against a defendant after state charges against him were dropped, the district court properly denied suppression of uncounseled statements made by him to a federal agent because the federal and state crimes were separate offenses for the purposes of the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gause, No. 05-4306,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court committed no reversible error where, while it failed to conform to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 because it did not inform defendant of U.S.'s right to use against him any statement that he made under oath, this error did not affect defendant's substantial rights because he agreed that U.S. could use any of his statements against him.
|
|||||
| United States v. Shull, No. 04-4767,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was vacated and remanded for resentencing where the sentence violated the Sixth Amendment under Booker because, based only on the facts that defendant admitted, his guideline range would have been 168-210 months, and defendant's sentence of 293 months exceeded the maximum authorized by the facts he admitted.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
