 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Angell v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co., No. 06-1966,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Schultz v. Astrue, No. 06-1770,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The denial of a social security claimant's application for benefits under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act was affirmed because substantial evidence supported the ALJ's conclusion that the claimant's ankle did not meet a listed impairment; the claimant's doctors never imposed any specific limitation on the claimant's ability to walk.
|
|||||
| Smith v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp., No. 06-1915,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. 3234 Wash. Ave. N., No. 06-1983,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court improperly granted summary judgment to government in forfeiture action under Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000 because property owner asserted its interest in property and contested government's right to forfeit it under 18 U.S.C.S. § 983(a)(4), and it presented evidence challenging credibility of government's witnesses.
|
|||||
| United States v. Balentine, No. 06-1587,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not clearly err in applying a two-level enhancement for more than minimal planning under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B2.1(b)(1) because defendant's planning, including wiring money to an accomplice, disabling the alarms, and destroying a surveillance tape, involved more than the minimal planning for bank robbery.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hardaway, No. 06-1589,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not clearly err in overruling defendant's objection to the PSR findings, which relied on the weight of the drugs near the time the narcotics were seized and which were supported by a preponderance of evidence, including the original laboratory report and a supplemental report indicating that weight loss was due to moisture loss.
|
|||||
| United States v. Irvin, No. 06-1492,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not plainly err in considering detective's hearsay testimony that a victim of defendant's forcible body cavity search and a confidential informant gave consistent statements about defendant's behavior because it was relevant to consideration of defendant's history and characteristics in sentencing under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a)(1).
|
|||||
| United States v. Jones, No. 06-2600,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's appeal from 18 U.S.C.S. § 922(g)(1) firearm possession conviction was denied. He did not show good cause for withdrawing his nolo contendere plea, as required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B). Search incident to his arrest was legal under U.S. Const. amend. IV. Sentencing credit issue was for BOP to decide under 18 U.S.C.S. § 3585(b)(2).
|
|||||
| United States v. Lomeli, No. 05-3959,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT, March 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence for a drug conspiracy charge was affirmed where the district court set the sentence at the low end of the advisory range after reviewing the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.S. § 3553(a) and where defendant failed to meet her burden of showing the unreasonableness of the presumptively reasonable sentence.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
