 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| In re Jones, No. 01-FM-1462,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's conviction of criminal contempt under D.C. Code Ann. § 16-1005(f) was reversed as appellant's willful violation of a no contact provision in a CPO depended on a willful violation of the stay away provision and appellant was not put on notice that a failure to keep a particular distance away was itself a violation.
|
|||||
| In re T.H., No. 05-FS-306,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court used the proper probable cause standard to decide appellee's, a juvenile's, motion to suppress his arrest, and, as he was a passenger in the back seat of a sport utility vehicle containing fireworks in its rear compartment, he did not constructively possess the fireworks, so there was no Fourth Amendment probable cause to arrest him.
|
|||||
| Scott v. United States, No. 04-CM-332,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Failure of trial court to adequately inquire into alleged intimidation of a defense witness by a police detective was harmless error and did not support reversal of destruction of property conviction where there was no claim that witness failed to testify due to intimidation and eyewitness testimony provided basis for conviction.
|
|||||
| Settlemire v. District of Columbia Office of Emple. Appeals, No. 03-CV-590,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 11, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As no meaningful relief was available to an employee on his challenge to his reassignment within the police department after the position to which he sought to be returned was abolished, dismissal of his appeal as moot by the District of Columbia Office of Employee Appeals was affirmed. Attorney's fees were not available, D.C. Code § 1-606.08.
|
|||||
| In re Harkins, No. 05-BG-517,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Aggregate of attorney's multiple sexually abusive contacts and stalker-like harassments rose to level of professional misconduct and constituted sanctionable ethics violation under D.C. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(b). A 30-day suspension was a more appropriate sanction than the Board on Professional Responsibility's recommendation of public censure.
|
|||||
| United States v. McMillian, No. 05-CO-310,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS, May 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to suppress evidence was denied on appeal as the Government was not collaterally estopped from litigating the motion. Additionally, although defendant was illegally seized under the Fourth Amendment, the generation of probable cause to arrest him after his detention broke the causal link between his illegal seizure and his confession.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
