 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ege v. Yukins, No. 05-2078,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 24, 2007, Decided , April 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The conditional grant of a habeas petitioner's writ as to her Fourteenth Amendment due process claim was affirmed where she had been convicted largely upon expert testimony, presented with foundation, that a bite mark on the victim's cheek could have been caused by only the petitioner and none of the other 3.5 million people in the Detroit area.
|
|||||
| Noble v. Barnhart, No. 06-5531,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When a Social Security claimant's case was remanded per sentence six of 42 U.S.C.S. § 405(g), allowing consideration of newly discovered evidence, and he was then found to be disabled, he was not allowed attorney's fees under the EAJA, 28 U.S.C.S. § 2412(d)(1)(A), as the Commissioner's initial position of no disability was substantially justified.
|
|||||
| United States v. Conteh, Nos. 05-3714; 05-3715; 05-3716,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the testimony showed that a defendant recruited another the scheme, the defendant's presence throughout the interstate transportation and cashing of the bogus check was intended to support and aid the other's completion of the illegal transaction, there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's aiding and abetting conviction.
|
|||||
| United States v. Marshall, No. 06-5102,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was properly convicted under 21 U.S.C.S. § 841(a)(1) for methamphetamine offenses because his prior record, given that he asserted an entrapment defense and took the stand, was admissible, and, while certain of the prosecutor's statements were improper, they were not unfairly prejudicial given the overwhelming incriminating evidence.
|
|||||
| United States v. White, No. 05-6737,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 25, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was properly convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm per 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g), and his sentence enhanced under 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(e)(1), as the evidence showed that officers knocked and announced before entering his house, suppression was unwarranted even if they did not, and prior cocaine offenses were committed days apart.
|
|||||
| Freightliner of Knoxville, Inc. v. DaimlerChrysler Vans, LLC, No. 06-6054,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 26, 2007, Decided , April 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of the dealer's Robinson-Patman Act (RPA) claim was reversed because without discovery it was virtually impossible for the dealer show that a business link program created incentives paid for by the distributor in order to give another dealership a competitive advantage over the dealer in violation of the RPA.
|
|||||
| Lancaster v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec., No. 06-5859,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Substantial evidence did not support ALJ's finding that social security disability benefit claimant was not disabled under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1382c; the ALJ inconsistently characterized claimant's restrictions as "mild" or "moderate," misconstrued the vocational expert's testimony, and set forth incorrect legal standard for treating physician's opinion.
|
|||||
| Lewis v. Adams County, No. 06-3893,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Expert's opinion, stating that it was highly unlikely that decedent was pointing rifle at officers, contrasted with consistent testimony from officers at scene and medical examiner's opinion that physical evidence was consistent with officers' testimony and was not enough to take claim that use of deadly force violated Fourth Amendment to jury.
|
|||||
| United States v. Phillips, No. 06-5746,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, April 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of conspiracy, child pornography possession, and aiding and abetting a minor's sexual exploitation per 18 U.S.C.S. §§ 2251, 2252, he voluntarily gave an inculpatory statement as he agreed to an FBI meeting, waived his rights, and an agent's comments about him being a monster focused him on the situation's severity.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
