 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Page, No. 06-4256,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's waiver of appellate rights was valid and enforceable, where the district court complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 in conducting defendant's guilty plea hearing, the language of the waiver and plea agreement was clear and unmistakable, and defendant had been fully advised about, and understood, the terms of the plea agreement.
|
|||||
| United States v. Billups, No. 06-4666,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was sufficient evidence to conclude that defendant intended to distribute cocaine base, under 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1), as there was sufficient evidence to conclude that he possessed cocaine base, pistol, and drug paraphernalia and these items were consistent with intention to distribute. Defendant's drug and firearm convictions were affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Harris, No. 06-4412,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the sentence was within the statutory maximum and it was not plainly unreasonable (defendant had repeated the conduct for which he was originally convicted, and had been on supervised release for just over one month), the 18 month sentence imposed upon the revocation of defendant's supervised release was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hubbard, No. 06-4524,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a conviction for receipt of child pornography, there was probable cause to issue two search warrants based on police interviews of two young boys, who described being molested by defendant, and an interview of their mother, defendant's former girlfriend, who had discovered child pornography in defendant's home and in his mother's home.
|
|||||
| United States v. King, No. 06-4416,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was affirmed because he failed to rebut the presumption that his sentence, which was within the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual, was reasonable; defendant's family responsibilities was not relevant in determining whether a departure was warranted, and the district court addressed the 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ocampo, No. 06-4698,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to support defendant's conviction for possession of a firearm and ammunition by an illegal alien because, given the fingerprint evidence and the location of the gun and ammunition relative to defendant's position in the car, the jury could reasonably have concluded that defendant was in possession of the gun and ammunition.
|
|||||
| United States v. Stuck, No. 05-4467,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 16, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's argument that his confession should have been suppressed lacked merit because defendant was properly advised of his Miranda rights, and the mere fact that some time had elapsed from the beginning of questioning did not vitiate the original Miranda warnings and waivers.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
