Case law

United States v. Elliot Rivera

780 F.3d 1084 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 12, 2015

Clearly, Rodriguez’s testimony did not constitute hearsay. … To qualify, a witness’s opinion is limited to opinions that are “(a) rationally based on the witness’s perception; (b) helpful to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue; and (c)

Ernest Cadet v. State of Florida Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 24, 2017

That attorney has clearly violated the ABA rules. … Justice Alito’s concurrence comprised two clearly delineated sections: the first section discussed negligence, and the second did not.

United States v. Carlos Martinez

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 10, 2024

But the district court’s factual findings establish the opposite. … But the district court’s factual find- ings established otherwise.

United States v. Travis A. Bacon

446 F. App'x 177 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 2, 2011

“To determine whether a defendant qualifies, a sentencing court should consider whether he truthfully admitted or did not falsely deny any additional relevant conduct.” United States v. … Here, the district court did not clearly err in finding that Bacon did not accept responsibility for all relevant conduct.

David Ojeda-Sanchez v. Carmelo Hernandez-Rubio

499 F. App'x 897 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 29, 2012

To the extent that the district court made findings of fact that led it to the legal conclusions that Bland’s actions were neither willful nor taken in bad faith, we review them under the clearly erroneous standard. … The court noted that Bland’s payroll clerk was a qualified accountant (master’s degree in accounting) and that her credible testimony was that she took great care to record Farmworkers hours correctly and to correct error

United States v. Adan Gil Miranda

220 F. App'x 965 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 23, 2007

A: Just clearly because he was in the closet, no, sir. The person in the closet is irrelevant. … He was then granted use immunity and compelled to testify at trial pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6003. During his direct examination, Cuevas testified, without objection, as follows: Q: Mr.

United States v. Shynita Townsend

502 F. App'x 870 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 21, 2012

Townsend argued that an evidentiary hearing was required to establish “the totality of the circumstances” before the district court. … Thus, Townsend was unable to establish that the information in her motion was “new or newly discovered.”

Davis v. Chiles

139 F.3d 1414 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 30, 1998

First, Davis’s plan would require changes to Article V, Section 10 of the Florida Constitution, which directs that circuit and county judges be elected “by a vote of the qualified electors within the territorial jurisdiction … The Supreme Court has clearly and repeatedly held that Section Two applies to state judicial elections. See Chisom v.

Stanley McCray v. Warden, FCC Coleman - LOW

491 F. App'x 95 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 2, 2012

[makes] findings of fact that are clearly erroneous.” Id. at 1137 n.69 (alterations in original) (internal quotation marks omitted). … United States, 544 U.S. 13, 26 (2005), in which the Supreme Court held that a sentencing court cannot look to police reports in determining whether a prior conviction qualifies as a violent felony.

Luis Enriquez Lorenzo Rodriguez v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 4, 2021

Hu- bert that attempted Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a crime of vio- lence under § 924(c)’s elements clause. 909 F.3d at 351. … Accordingly, because the government’s position is clearly correct as a matter of law, we GRANT its motion for summary af- firmance and DENY as moot its accompanying motion to stay the briefing schedule.

Jordan E. Lubin v. Steven Skow

382 F. App'x 866 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 14, 2010

However, if the Trustee can establish a direct harm to the Holding Company caused by the Bank officers, that harm would be separate from the derivative harm. … Farley Indus., 7 The Trustee argues that Iqbal is limited to cases resolving qualified immunity against a constitutional tort claim. We have consistently applied Iqbal beyond that limited scope.

Sandra Felix-Marroquin v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 9, 2022

The BIA concluded that the IJ did not clearly err in determining that Felix-Marroquin’s rape was a crime of oppor- tunity rather than persecution on account of a statutorily protected ground. … ’t qualify for humanitarian asylum or withholding of removal. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(iii) (requiring past persecution on account of a 2 Because Felix-Marroquin failed to establish a nexus between her harm and her proposed

United States v. Willie Lee Lewis

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 22, 2025

“[U]nlike harmless error—where the government car- ries the burden—the onus of establishing prejudice under plain er- ror rests with the defendant.” United States v. … Here, Lewis’s crimes are even more clearly temporally distinct.

United States v. Leopoldo Jaime Bryan

384 F. App'x 916 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 25, 2010

The probation officer noted that, due to his criminal history, Bryan qualified as an armed career criminal, which enhanced his offense level to 37 and set his criminal history category as VI. … court (1) properly calculated the guideline range, (2) treated the guidelines as advisory, (3) considered the § 3553(a) factors, (4) did not select a 4 sentence based on clearly

United States v. Lisette Lopez

75 F.4th 1337 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 7, 2023

“No person shall be regarded as, or found to be, a person of good moral character who, during the period for which good moral character is required to be established,” committed one of the specified … That provision is clearly indivisible, as it does not include any clauses that could be con- strued as alternative elements. See Talamantes-Enriquez v. U.S.

Johnnie Teresa Marchisio v. Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC.

919 F.3d 1288 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 25, 2019

On the record before us, it clearly did so. … Rather, the agreement clearly states that the corrected reporting shall be done “as soon as reasonably possible.”

Troy Curry-Pennamon v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 16, 2022

Because the state courts did not unreasonably apply clearly established federal law when they rejected Curry-Pennamon’s postconviction challenges, we af- firm the denial of relief on his claims of ineffective trial counsel … A state prisoner is entitled to a writ of habeas cor- pus only if the state court reached a decision that “involved an un- reasonable application of . . . clearly established Federal law.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1).

Hand,et al v. Scott,et al

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 25, 2018

Nonetheless, after concluding only that the Florida regime posed a risk of discrimination among applicants, the district court enjoined Florida from exercising the authority that § 2 clearly establishes because the district … But the defendants recognize that clemency power is not immune from judicial review and constitutional scrutiny. See Ohio Adult Parole Auth. v.

Devier v. Zant

3 F.3d 1445 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 23, 1993

Devier, however, does not allege how he could have established an intoxication defense at trial without his own testimony. … prior rape as a nonstatutory aggravating factor; (3) failure to proffer results of a polygraph examination casting doubt on Devier's guilt; (4) failure to present evidence concerning the unconstitutionality of a "death-qualified

Sara Watts v. Joggers Run Property Owners Association, Inc.

133 F.4th 1032 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 7, 2025

Gen- erally, “ownership” of a home means the owner has “the totality of rights, powers, privileges[,] and immunities which constitute com- plete property.” … First, we concluded that the utility services were “clearly, directly connected to the sale or rental of a dwelling” because as part of buying a home, a resident “must obtain basic utility services