 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Franco, No. 99-2194,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 11, 2007, Decided , April 11, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While defendant's attorney harped on the need for prior notice of the bad acts pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 404(b), he did not ask the district court judge for an explanation as to why the evidence passed muster under Fed. R. Evid. 403. The evidence was admissible because the government used to rebut defendant's entrapment defense.
|
|||||
| Macy v. Hopkins County Sch. Bd. of Educ., No. 06-5722,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Decided , April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the employee had not presented evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that the employer's proffered reason for firing her was pretextual, and because the employee had forfeited her retaliation claims and state-law claims, the appellate court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
|
|||||
| McGraw v. Madison Twp, No. 06-3620,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate court lacked jurisdiction to hear on appeal issues that concerned sufficiency of evidence. Defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because plaintiff did not represent an immediate threat to the officers or to the public and took no action that caused the officers to fear for their safety or for the safety of others.
|
|||||
| United States v. Burk, Nos. 06-5817, 06-5824,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court rejected defendant's claim that 324-month sentence imposed on drug conspiracy conviction was greater than necessary in light of his drug addiction, his immediate cooperation, and stable family life. District court discussed virtually all 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors and expressly considered drug addiction, family support, and cooperation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Cartwright, No. 05-6866,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence supported felon in possession of firearm and felon in possession of ammunition convictions under 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1). Detective testified that defendant confessed to possessing shotgun and having shotgun shells in car in connection with attempt to sell shotgun, and witness said that defendant offered to sell witness shotgun.
|
|||||
| United States v. Graham, No. 05-4566,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Decided , April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of motion to suppress was affirmed because defendant was lawfully seized because his car was parked illegally, and officers' observation of defendant reaching under the seat, when considered in conjunction with the tip that defendant would be at that location and armed, created the requisite reasonable suspicion to justify a Terry frisk.
|
|||||
| United States v. Mitchell, No. 05-6908,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Guideline range was properly calculated following convictions under 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1(b)(1) possession of firearm enhancement after U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3D1.2(c) grouping was not double counting. False testimony warranted obstruction of justice enhancement.
|
|||||
| United States v. Prado, Nos. 06-5053 & 06-5054,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sentences imposed on defendants following guilty pleas to violating 21 U.S.C.S. § 846 were not greater than necessary to achieve purposes of 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a); it was not unreasonable for district court to find that one defendant was integral part of drug conspiracy or to treat the other as career offender under USSG § 4B1.1.
|
|||||
| Wenner v. Sun Life Assur. Co., Nos. 05-6534/6740,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 12, 2007, Decided , April 12, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insurer violated 29 U.S.C.S. § 1133(2) by failing to afford a reasonable opportunity to the insured for a full and fair review by the appropriate named fiduciary of the decision denying the claim. Purpose of § 1133 was to notify the insured of the plan administrator's reasons for denying his claims and affording him a fair opportunity for review.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
