 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Gutierrez, No. 04-4069, No. 05-1068,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A district court's Booker error in refusing to make independent determinations as to the quantity of drugs defendant possessed and as to whether he possessed firearms during the offense was not harmless because his guideline range would have been greater if the enhancements recommended by the PSR had been applied.
|
|||||
| United States v. Idriss, No. 04-3886, No. 04-3887, No. 04-3888, No. 04-3889,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in viewing the Sixth Amendment limitation on the guidelines as excluding all enhancements based on its fact finding because enhancements of defendants' sentences for the amount of money defrauded or for obstruction of justice were within the statutory maximum; thus, resentencing was warranted because the error was not harmless.
|
|||||
| United States v. Olthoff, No. 04-4159,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where firearms that defendant stole during a "crime spree" were available to him to brandish and use as a threat during multiple burglaries, the district court properly found that defendant used the firearms during the burglaries for purposes of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(b)(5). The burglaries were crimes of violence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Phimvongsa, No. 05-2360,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Vaca-Arceo, No. 05-1350,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although district court plainly erred in sentencing defendant under mandatory application of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, the error was not prejudicial because he was sentenced toward the middle of the calculated Guidelines range and nothing in the record suggested he would have received a more lenient sentence under an advisory Guidelines scheme.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
