 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Ashman v. Barrows, No. 05-3098,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: University employers were not entitled to summary judgment in an action brought by an employee under 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983, alleging that the employers retaliated against her for complaining about the university's treatment of limited term employees, because there were genuine issues of disputed facts that needed to be resolved.
|
|||||
| Li v. Gonzales, Nos. 03-3461, 03-4310 & 04-3902,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien's claim for asylum under 8 U.S.C.S. §§ 1101(a)(42) and 1158(b)(1) was deficient where, for example, he only mentioned one or two minor run-ins with police when he was a teenager and these isolated incidents did not rise to the level of persecution. He also failed to show any likelihood of future persecution.
|
|||||
| Parker v. Barnhart, No. 05-1417,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because claimant did not offer district court any excuse for late filing of notice of appeal and district court did not provide any other rationale for its decision to extend time to file appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5)(A), district court abused its discretion in granting extension, so court dismissed claimant's appeal as untimely filed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Bryant, No. 05-1497,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence was vacated because his prior juvenile conviction should not have been counted under USSG § 4A1.2(d), error was not harmless because it bumped defendant from criminal history category I to category II, which carried higher sentencing range, and district court did not consider lower guideline range when imposing sentence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Feliciano, Nos. 02-4193, 03-1446 & 03-1270,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although it was severe (life imprisonment), defendant's sentence was within the U.S. Sentencing Guideline range, which remained the starting point and a presumptively reasonable disposition. District judge did not address the 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors, as it occurred before Booker, but that did not turn a reasonable sentence into plain error.
|
|||||
| United States v. Kumpf, No. 05-2972,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While the parameters of personal assistance under the Refugee Relief Act had not been clearly delineated, a former Nazi concentration camp guard's own actions constituted personal assistance in persecution. His claim of no affirmative or direct acts of harm did not alter this conclusion, and his 8 U.S.C.S. § 1451(a) denaturalization was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Mendoza, No. 05-2681,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant only offered conclusory statements regarding his privacy interest in an unattached garage in which a vehicle containing drugs was parked. Without some factual finding establishing that defendant had an actual or subjective expectation of privacy, the appellate court affirmed the district court's finding of no Fourth Amendment violation.
|
|||||
| United States v. Rose, No. 03-4230,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Smith, No. 05-1638,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT, February 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court had no authority under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3582(c) to deny an inmate's motion to substitute a 24-month sentence for a 37-month term, because once the sentence--an alternative sentence it imposed based on whether the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines survived the United States Supreme Court's review--had been imposed, it could not make changes.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
