 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Meyet v. Gonzales, No. 05-2284,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review was denied as substantial evidence supported adverse credibility finding and ruling that alien failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution as necessary to establish eligibility for asylum, under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(a). Court lacked jurisdiction over CAT claim, under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(d)(1).
|
|||||
| Schifferli v. South Carolina, No. 04-7196,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of a 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 petition filed by an inmate who claimed that counsel failed to inform him of the consequences of his guilty plea was proper because a state court found counsel's testimony credible and the state court's conclusion that counsel's performance was neither deficient nor prejudicial was not contrary to federal law.
|
|||||
| United States v. Fisher, No. 06-4536,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was reasonable as district court (1) properly calculated guideline range and appropriately treated guidelines as advisory, (2) sentenced defendant only after considering factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) and his arguments based on those factors, and (3) stated that it was imposing a sentence in accordance with Booker.
|
|||||
| United States v. Mitchell, No. 05-4199; No. 05-4200; No. 05-4259,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT, March 19, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A coconspirator's statements were made during the course of and in furtherance of a conspiracy because the statements assured other coconspirators that a sufficient demand existed for a drug supply and that a trafficking operation had evaded detection; thus, the statements were admissible against defendants under Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(E).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
