 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Krumnow, No. 06-50241,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's concurrent sentence for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) was vacated and remanded because the district court erred by imposing his drug-possession and firearm-possession sentences to run concurrently; 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c)(1)(A) required that the sentences run consecutively.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ramirez-Ortiz, No. 06-50938,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Salinas, No. 06-40567 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 12-month sentence following revocation of his supervised release was affirmed because, although the district court referred to conduct charged in one of the violations to which defendant had pled not true, the district court did not indicate that the sentence was in any way based on that information; there was no due-process violation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Three Hundred Sixty-Nine Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Dollars in United States Currency, No. 06-40540 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a 21 U.S.C.S. § 881(a)(6) and 18 U.S.C.S. § 981(a)(1)(A) civil forfeiture case, the district court's denial of the claimants' motion to suppress and motion for a judgment as a matter of law was affirmed since, inter alia, consent had been given to search a claimant's truck, and the scope of the search did not exceed the scope of the consent.
|
|||||
| United States v. Tostado-Nunez, No. 06-51061,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Williams, No. 06-30288 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 18, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Unites States v. Compean, No. 05-20745 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 18, 2007, Filed
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. |
