 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Farrakhan v. City of Omaha, No. 04-3960,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Hansl, No. 05-2540,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Guard's service at concentration camps constituted personal assistance in the persecution that occurred in those concentration camps within the meaning of the Refugee Relief Act of 1953, Pub. L. 83-203, § 14(a), 67 Stat. 400 (1953). Thus, he was not lawfully admitted to the United States, and his subsequent naturalization was illegally procured.
|
|||||
| United States v. Meyer, No. 05-1822,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Post-Kokkonen, a motion to expunge a criminal record that was based solely on equitable grounds did not invoke the ancillary jurisdiction of the district court. The district court was instructed to grant the Government's motion to vacate the expungement order entered by a magistrate in favor of a person who sought expungement to maintain his job.
|
|||||
| United States v. Porter, No. 05-2342,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Non-guidelines sentence imposed represented a significant upward deviation from the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines sentencing range--even after the upward departure under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4A1.3. Nevertheless, the district court carefully evaluated and applied the 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) factors, and reached an appropriate sentence.
|
|||||
| Watson Coatings, Inc. v. Am. Express Travel Related Servs., No. 05-1357,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 7, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
