 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Minn. PUC v. FCC, No. 05-1069, No. 05-1122, No. 05-3114, No. 05-3118,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: FCC order preempting state regulation of telecommunication services which utilized technology call Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) was affirmed. FCC did not arbitrarily and capriciously determine that it was impractical or impossible (47 U.S.C.S. § 152(b)) to separate the intrastate components of VoIP service from its interstate components.
|
|||||
| Nabulwala v. Gonzales, No. 05-4128,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien's petition for review was granted because in finding that an alien's suffering in Uganda due to her sexual orientation did not rise to the level of persecution under 8 U.S.C.S. §§ 1101, 1158(b)(1), the IJ made no finding as to whether the government was unable or unwilling to control persons who had harmed, or would harm, the alien.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hyles, No. 06-1381,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because district court correctly found that defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his Miranda rights three times, his Fifth and Sixth Amendment and due process rights were not violated by the officers' interrogation. Also, district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting certain evidence, and defendant's conviction was affirmed.
|
|||||
| United States v. White, No. 06-3313,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 21, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not exceed any boundaries by sentencing defendant to twenty-four months' imprisonment upon revocation. District court's sentencing colloquy revealed that it did, in fact, consider and discuss the factors suggested by 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) even though it did not particularly elucidate § 3553(a).
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
