 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Govan v. Gammon, No. 06-1472,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Gully v. Maynard, No. 06-3807,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed an inmate's 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b) because the inmate could not base a deliberate indifference claim on his own opinion as to what dental treatment he should have received or on the dentist's alleged negligence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Baker, No. 06-2580,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Despite defendant's allegations that witness intimidation demanded a new trial, evidence tying defendant to the scene of the crime - including baggie of crack cocaine with defendant's fingerprint on it among other things - made it unlikely that any witness statements would result in defendant's acquittal of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
|
|||||
| United States v. Castro-Gaxiola, No. 06-2249, No. 06-2258, No. 06-2266,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal was affirmed because a reasonable jury could find defendants guilty on the aiding and abetting charges, especially since the government was not required to prove that defendants possessed or sold the drugs in order to impose liability.
|
|||||
| United States v. Feather, No. 06-2939,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant committed both of the sexual assaults for which he was convicted under the heavy influence of alcohol. Thus, defendant's inability to curb his alcohol consumption constituted a serious threat and the district court's sentence was not greater than was necessary to achieve the purposes of sentencing set forth in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a)(2).
|
|||||
| Mouawad v. Gonzales, No. 06-1688,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1158, the court did not have jurisdiction to review an IJ's finding that an alien's application for asylum was time-barred. However, the petition was granted with respect to denial of the alien's CAT claim because the IJ never explicitly considered the likelihood that the alien would be tortured if returned to Lebanon.
|
|||||
| United States v. Meads, No. 06-3111,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal from 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1) possession of firearm conviction was denied. District court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defendant's request to give "mere presence" jury instruction because evidence did not support giving of that instruction. Jury was properly instructed on possession and government's burden of proof.
|
|||||
| Wilbourn v. S.D. State Penitentiary, No. 05-4095,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 14, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court properly dismissed inmate's pro se 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 complaint because the inmate had "three strikes" under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1915(g), was not under imminent danger of serious physical injury, and had not paid the district court filing fee.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
