Case law

United States v. Adams

1 F.3d 1566 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 22, 1993

Whether the evidence established multiple conspiracies instead of only one. 1 III. DISCUSSION A. … “To qualify as harmless, an error must not contribute to the defendant’s conviction.” Owen, 849 F.2d at 540 .

Ernest Franklin Clark v. Argutto

221 F. App'x 819 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 13, 2007

, “there is no room for qualified immunity.” … Therefore, to the extent defendants asserted that they were entitled to qualified immunity, that argument is unavailing. 13 cell and in a position to intervene, but failing

Pollgreen v. Morris

911 F.2d 527 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 7, 1990

The court determined that the owners had conclusively established the defense of duress and that the failure of the INS to consider the defense was "arbitrary, capricious and constituted an abuse of discretion." … Additionally, the court found that "the exceptional and unusual circumstances present here fit clearly within the flexibility allowed by the statute ... to exceed the statutory base." Id.

Executive Town & Country Services, Inc. v. City Of Atlanta

789 F.2d 1523 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 23, 1986

We will uphold a state regulation if it regulates "evenhandedly," if it imposes only an "incidental" burden on interstate commerce, and if the "burden imposed on such commerce is [not] clearly excessive in relation to the … Furthermore, "it would undercut the fundamental policy of Parker and the state action doctrine of immunizing state action from federal antitrust scrutiny. See 1 P. Areeda & D.

United States v. Anthony Alexander Bridgewater

333 F. App'x 470 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 24, 2009

The district court found, however, that the two sales constituted two separate qualifying convictions. … “The Government bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence the facts necessary to support a sentencing enhancement.

Che Eric Sama v. U.S. Attorney General

887 F.3d 1225 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 19, 2018

So the immigration judge ruled that Sama did not qualify for asylum or any other form of relief. The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Sama’s appeal. … “To establish asylum eligibility based on . . . [a] protected ground, the alien must, with credible evidence, establish (1) past persecution on account of . . .

United States v. Diaz

26 F.3d 1533 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 1994

Burke, 738 F.2d 1225, 1227-28 (11th Cir.1984) (sufficient information elicited where jury knows a witness has been granted immunity, participated in the witness protection program, and received money from the government). … Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err by finding that the prosecutor offered a race-neutral reason for striking Portis from the jury. D.

Sherryl Snodgrass Caffey v. State of Alabama

243 F. App'x 505 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 6, 2007

Caffey does not challenge this ruling on appeal. 6 Defendant Blakely in his individual capacity based on qualified immunity. … First, the mere fact that Caffey was placed in a holding cell that had a window on the door and a camera in the cell for surveillance does not establish an Eighth Amendment violation. See Harris v.

Forehand v. Florida State Hospital at Chattahoochee

89 F.3d 1556 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 6, 1996

Accordingly, based on the limited record, we are unable to determine whether the special master’s findings were clearly erroneous. … See Payne, 673 F.2d at 826 (holding that the court’s decision to accept one party’s statistical evidence was not clearly erroneous).

Timothy Finnerty v. Stiefel Laboratories, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 30, 2014

A stock bonus plan, like the ESBP, is an employee compensation program, established and maintained by an employer, which distributes benefits in the form of cash or stock in the employer company. … To qualify for certain tax-favored treatment, a stock bonus plan must meet the requirements of Internal Revenue Code § 401(a) and, in turn, § 409(h). See 26 U.S.C. § 401(a)(23); John D.

S.H. And P.F., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Joe Edwards and R. Derril Gay, Individually and in Their Official Capacity

860 F.2d 1045 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 9, 1989

Although the Supreme Court vacated our judgment in Donaldson because this court had not considered the qualified immunity defense, the Court indicated that our opinion was deprived of any precedential force. … Nowhere did the district court consider the validity of this claim, a claim clearly made out in the plaintiffs' amended complaint.

In Re: Craig Piazza, Craig Piazza v. Nueterra Healthcare Physical Therapy, LLC

719 F.3d 1253 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 26, 2013

Subsection (b), as discussed, establishes a fairly sophisticated computation scheme for determining when a movant has established certain presumptions and when a debtor has successfully rebutted those presumptions. … Piazza was clearly on notice of Nueterra’s motion to dismiss for bad faith.

United States v. Jack C. Turner

871 F.2d 1574 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 9, 1989

In order to qualify as a coconspirator statement, there must have existed a conspiracy involving the declarant and the defendant, and the statement must have been made during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy … In this case, independent evidence established that Jackson was part of the conspiracy and that the statements were made during the course of that conspiracy.

Atlanta Gas Light Co. v. UGI Utilities, Inc.

463 F.3d 1201 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 6, 2006

Augustine Gas stock but because the management clearly was out of CenterPoint’s hands, AGLC does not contend that CenterPoint is responsible after 1935. … Augustine Gas facility in 1926 was clearly as an employee of the subsidiary, and not on behalf of UGI.

United States v. Jennifer A. Sparks

806 F.3d 1323 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 1, 2015

This affidavit established probable cause that the cell phone contained evidence of criminal activity. … But the affidavit’s descriptions, in and of themselves, established the child-pornographic nature of the images.

Davis v. Monroe Cty. Board of Ed.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 14, 1996

It is well established that “[c]ourts must assume that Congress intended the ordinary meaning of the words it used, and absent a clearly expressed legislative intent to the contrary, that language is generally dispositive … Third, the harassment LaShonda faced clearly was on the basis of her sex.

Alabama Power Co. v. United States Department of Energy

307 F.3d 1300 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 24, 2002

This would leave in place the 1.0 mil per kilowatt-hour fee as the statutory requirement, totally immune from administrative alteration. … See 5 The relevant part of the NWPA provides: Not later than 180 days after January 7, 1983, the Secretary shall establish procedures for the collection and payment of the fees established

Lissette Hernandez v. Bob Hansell

695 F. App'x 523 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 11, 2017

The court granted summary judgment after determining that officers Davila, Yacoub, Acevedo, and Furey are entitled to qualified immunity. We agree with that determination. … Those claims are not at issue here. 2  Case: 16-17124 Date Filed: 08/11/2017 Page: 3 of 4 “clearly established” law in entering and searching Hernandez

United States v. Sarras

575 F.3d 1191 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 23, 2009

In his medical opinion, two of the laptop photos showed a penis that, unlike Sarras’s, was “clearly completely circumcised.” … Ferdon had examined 15,000 penises, specialized in erectile dysfunction, and was qualified to give an opinion that it was not Sarras in the laptop photos.

United States v. Augustin Alvarez, Oscar Hernandez, Mario C. Simon, Rolando Rios, Ramon Raymond, Eduardo Portal, Victoriano Concepcion, A/K/A "Macho"

755 F.2d 830 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 20, 1985

First, the evidence clearly established that the drug conspiracy was designed to effectuate the sale of a large quantity of cocaine. … There was no need to instruct the jury about that element, however, because the undisputed evidence in the case clearly established that Young did not use excessive force.