 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Honarvar, No. 06-2713, No. 06-2720,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Convictions for bank fraud, 18 U.S.C.S. § 1344, and making false statements were affirmed as government presented sufficient evidence that defendants, in fact, conspired and knowingly falsified income on credit card applications in an attempt to increase the amount of credit extended so that they could continue scheme of accumulating credit.
|
|||||
| United States v. Jimenez, No. 06-3365,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Police officer had a reasonable, articulable suspicion to detain appellant and expand scope of traffic stop based on conflicting stories regarding travel plans; fact that appellant was planning to leave car at city; lack of tickets, money, and plans to return home after leaving car; and fact that car's kick panel and molding had been removed.
|
|||||
| United States v. Lynch, No. 06-2894,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence as a career offender was proper since similar assault offenses on consecutive days were properly treated as separate offenses, the USSG career offender provisions had definable standards and did not violate due process, and the USSG was properly applied as advisory in determining that defendant was a career offender.
|
|||||
| United States v. Malsch, No. 05-4391,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After defendant pled guilty to child pornography, a district court did not clearly err in applying the specific offense adjustment in U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2G2.2(b)(3) because the image, which was attributed to defendant and depicted an adult male sexually penetrating a 12-year-old minor, was per se sadistic.
|
|||||
| United States v. Worley, No. 05-4206,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, February 26, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to dismiss a charge under 18 U.S.C.S. § 2251(a) based on legal impossibility and his claim that the alleged 11-year-old victim did not exist was properly denied because an actual minor victim was not required for a conviction under § 2251(a) for attempting to entice a minor.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
