 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Clary v. Barnhart, No. 06-30615 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's affirmation of the SSA's finding that a claimant was not disabled was affirmed because, inter alia, nothing in the claimant's medical reports supported a finding that her knee injuries constituted a gross anatomical deformity, and it could not be said that an ALJ improperly evaluated the claimant's credibility.
|
|||||
| O'Reilly v. United States Army Corps of Eng'rs, No. 04-31026,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a NEPA case, a district's court's finding that the Army Corps of Engineers acted arbitrarily in issuing a FONSI was affirmed since there was nothing in the record to support the conclusion that the mitigation measures would render insignificant the identified adverse impacts of a development project.
|
|||||
| United States v. Alvarez-Gomez, No. 06-50003 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's 70-month sentence for violating 8 U.S.C.S. §1326 was affirmed because the district court was aware of its authority to impose a sentence below the advisory USSG, the sentence was within the advisory USSG and was presumptively reasonable, and his Apprendi argument was foreclosed by the Almendarez-Torres decision.
|
|||||
| United States v. Garza, No. 05-41547 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1324(a)(1)(B)(i) and 18 U.S.C.S. § 2 was affirmed because the district court did not err in applying a six-level U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2L1.1(b)(4)(C) (2004) enhancement to the sentence for possession of a dangerous weapon even if the handgun found in the glove compartment was unloaded.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hernandez, No. 05-41611,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to suppress was properly denied because reasonable suspicion supported Border Patrol agent's stop of defendant's vehicle as events took place close to border and notorious alien smuggling route, anonymous tipster claimed to have seen smuggling firsthand moments before call, and tip provided color, number, and type of vehicles.
|
|||||
| United States v. Jones, No. 06-30421 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Phillips, No. 05-51271,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 1030(a)(5)(A)(ii) and (B)(i) was affirmed because, inter alia, any errors in the district court's jury instructions did not affect defendant's substantial rights, and the sentence was affirmed since the district court did not err in ordering defendant to pay restitution under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3663A.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ruiz-Carmona, No. 05-40550 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal of his conviction and sentence was dismissed as to his DNA collection claim and his claim that the district court erred by failing to rule on his motion for a downward departure because the appellate court lacked jurisdiction. His constitutional challenge to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(b) was foreclosed by the Almendarez-Torres decision.
|
|||||
| United States v. Wild, No. 06-50221 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, January 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's guilty-plea conviction for violating 21 U.S.C.S. §§ 952(a) and 960(a)(1) was affirmed because his plea agreement was enforceable, the district court did not err in denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea, and the district court did not err in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on his plea-withdrawal motion.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
