 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Morales v. Giurbino, No. 06-56060,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Nat'l Ass'n of Agric. Emples. v. FLRA, No. 06-71671,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: 5 U.S.C.S. § 7123(a)(2) precluded judicial review of Federal Labor Relations Authority's finding that agricultural inspectors were not "professional employees" under Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute, 5 U.S.C.S. § 7101 et seq., because finding was component of an appropriate bargaining unit determination under 5 U.S.C.S. § 7112.
|
|||||
| Song v. Gonzales, No. 05-71319,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An alien's conviction for third degree assault on his wife in violation of Haw. Rev. Stat. § 707-712(1)(a) was not a crime of violence within the definition of 18 U.S.C.S. § 16(a). Consequently, the subject conviction could not justify his removal pursuant to 8 U.S.C.S. § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i).
|
|||||
| United States v. Crapser, No. 05-30456,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: "Knock and talk" resulted in a voluntary, consensual encounter between defendant and the police outside of the motel room. When defendant opened the motel room door and came outside, he surrendered his heightened expectation of privacy and the Fourth Amendment protections -- including the right not to be detained based on reasonable suspicion.
|
|||||
| United States v. Estrada, No. 06-30148,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Gobert, No. 06-30208,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| United States v. Gonzalez-Perez, No. 05-10693,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Application of 16-level enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) was erroneous where statute under which defendant was convicted, § 787.02(1)(a), Fla. Stat., did not conform to generic, contemporary definition of kidnapping, and it did not constitute a categorical crime of violence for Sentencing Guidelines purposes.
|
|||||
| United States v. Jones, No. 06-30024,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(d)(2)(B) motion to withdraw his guilty plea to 18 U.S.C.S. § 1343 wire fraud was properly denied as, though he did not possess fraudulent intent when he obtained money from investors, he appropriated it and lied about its disposition; also, he offered only his misinterpretation of the law as a reason for withdrawal.
|
|||||
| United States v. Qing Chang Jiang, No. 05-10671,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, January 10, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Insufficient evidence supported defendant's conviction under 18 U.S.C.S. § 1001(a)(2) for making false statement to federal agent about number of microwave amplifiers exported to Chinese customer; context of statement, language barrier, and ambiguity of exchange undermined district court's finding that statement was material and intentional.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
