 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Gay, No. 05-20065 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where district court committed "Fanfan" error by sentencing defendant pursuant to mandatory guidelines scheme, error was harmless. At sentencing, court announced defendant would have been subject to harsher, 180-month sentence under advisory guideline regime, rather than 150-month sentence under mandatory guidelines scheme.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hemler, No. 05-50232 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal was dismissed, where defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived her right to appeal her sentence, except for a sentence that was the result of an upward departure from the sentencing guidelines and defendant's sentence did not constitute an upward departure from the guidelines.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hernandez-De la Torre, No. 04-50594 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although under Booker, sentencing under mandatory USSG constituted error that was plain, defendant failed to show that the error affected his substantial rights since there was no indication in the record that the district court would have sentenced him differently under advisory USSG. Thus, defendant's sentence was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Major, No. 04-11460 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendants' sentences were vacated and their cases remanded for resentencing because the district court erred in imposing the defendants' sentences under the mandatory Sentencing Guidelines, and there was no indication in the record that the district court would have imposed the same sentences if the Guidelines had been advisory.
|
|||||
| United States v. Martin-Parada, No. 04-41390 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was vacated and the case was remanded for resentencing where defendant argued that the district court reversibly erred under Booker by sentencing him pursuant to a mandatory application of the USSG, and the United States had not shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless. Defendant's conviction was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Navarro-Molina, No. 04-50387 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the district court's sentencing of defendant under the formerly mandatory U.S.S.G. constituted plain error, defendant failed to show that the error affected his substantial rights. As there existed no extraordinary circumstances or other grounds for relief, defendant's sentence was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Ochoa-Cruz, No. 05-50281,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An enhancement under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326(b)(2) and U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) for prior crime of violence convictions was affirmed because defendant failed to prove that the reliance on a presentence report alone affected his substantial rights where he did not argue that the convictions were not crimes of violence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Reinhart, 05-30245,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Though defendant received harsher sentence after partial success on appeal from conviction for violating 18 U.S.C.S. § 2251, sentence, which was imposed under advisory reading of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, was not vindictive and was reasonable where defendant took advantage of children under his care and tried to contact victim while in prison.
|
|||||
| United States v. Villegas-Cruz, No. 05-40093 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was vacated and the case was remanded for resentencing where defendant argued that the district court reversibly erred under Booker by sentencing him pursuant to a mandatory application of the USSG, and the United States had not shown beyond a reasonable doubt that the error was harmless. Defendant's conviction was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. White, No. 05-50702 Summary Calendar,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A rational jury could have found that defendant shared the criminal intent of the principals, that he participated in the venture by transporting them to distribute the cocaine base, and therefore that defendant aided and abetted in the possession of cocaine base with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C.S. § 841 and 18 U.S.C.S. § 2.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
