 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Buesgens v. Snow, No. 05-50730 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's denial of a former employee's request for appointment of counsel in a Title VII case was affirmed because the district court did not abuse its discretion. Although the employee may have been unable to afford the services of an attorney and had been unsuccessful in his efforts to locate one, the merits of his case were weak.
|
|||||
| Johnson v. Hous. Auth. of Jefferson Parish, No. 04-31201,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Participants in tenant-based voucher program under United States Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C.S. § 1437 et seq., were entitled to bring a private action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 to challenge calculation of their utility allowances by public housing authorities under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1437f(o)(2) and implementing regulations, 24 C.F.R. § 982.517.
|
|||||
| United States v. Avila-Fernandez, No. 04-50615 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant was unable to demonstrate a probability that the sentencing judge would have sentenced him differently under an advisory guidelines scheme, he was unable to demonstrate the extraordinary circumstances necessary for relief on his Booker claim. His 46-month prison sentence for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326 was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Castor-Lozano, No. 04-50449 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant was unable to demonstrate a probability that the sentencing judge would have sentenced him differently under an advisory guidelines scheme, he was unable to demonstrate the extraordinary circumstances necessary for relief on his Booker claim. His 46-month prison sentence for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326 was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. De Leon-Garcia, No. 04-41705 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Gonzalez-Silva, No. 04-41279 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was entitled to resentencing for illegal reentry because the government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the district court would not have sentenced him differently under an advisory guidelines sentencing regime and, thus, that the "Fanfan" error in sentencing him under a mandatory guidelines regime was harmless.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gonzalez-Trejo, No. 03-51417 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Following a remand from the United States Supreme Court, defendant's sentence for violating 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(a) was affirmed because his Booker claim was subject to review only in the presence of extraordinary circumstances, and defendant could not meet the less onerous plain error standard of review.
|
|||||
| United States v. Gutierrez-Mendez, No. 04-41404 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's "Fanfan" error in sentencing defendant for illegal reentry pursuant to a mandatory guidelines scheme was not harmless and required resentencing because there was no indication in the record that the district court would have imposed the same sentence had the guidelines been advisory rather than mandatory.
|
|||||
| United States v. Harms, No. 04-10631,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 6, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence supported defendant's convictions for mail fraud and perjury under 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 1341 and 1920 because a reasonable trier of fact could conclude that he failed to disclose material information regarding his activities while receiving workers' compensation benefits; however, the amount of loss was calculated incorrectly.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
