Case law

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.”

United States v. Johnny Lee Weaver

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 10, 2019

In-Court Identification The district court also did not clearly err in allowing Denise Murray’s in- court identification. … To establish prosecutorial misconduct, “(1) the remarks must be improper, and (2) the remarks must prejudicially affect the substantial rights of the defendant.” United States v.

United States v. Jorge Alipio Perez Villa

572 F. App'x 958 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 25, 2014

Perez Villa has pointed to no authority to establish that that provision is invalid or unenforceable. … The plea agreement gave the government the authority to decide not to move for it, and the facts and circumstances of the case clearly supported its decision.

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.

Public Citizen, Inc. v. Zell Miller

992 F.2d 1548 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 14, 1993

Plaintiffs' claims were not clearly ripe for adjudication prior to the November 24 run-off. … the Qualifications Clause sets forth requirements that relate to the 'personal qualifications' of a candidate, and that the majority vote statute, in contrast, regulates the 'manner' in which Georgia chooses among those 'qualified

United States v. James Jovan Ladson

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 12, 2022

Ladson sought a sentence reduction based on several medi- cal conditions, including chronic asthma, obesity, hypertension, and a compromised immune system. … Ladson also fails to establish that the district court abused its discretion by not giving sufficient weight to his rehabilitative ef- forts in prison.

United States v. Carlos Cedeno

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 5, 2026

Section 3582(c)(2) “establishes a two-step inquiry.” Dillon v. United States, 560 U.S. 817, 826 (2010). … We easily conclude the district court did not make a “clearly erroneous” factual finding. See United States v.

Jeanette M. Gary v. Jefferson County Commission

212 F. App'x 952 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 3, 2007

The Jefferson County Personnel Board offers a qualifying test for officers interested in being promoted to Sergeant. Gary has taken and passed this test annually since 1982. … As to the first requirement–a showing that the employee engaged in a protected activity–we have held that the filing of an EEOC complaint of race discrimination is “clearly” a protected activity for purposes of Title VII

United States v. Tico Daktari Holman

265 F. App'x 812 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 15, 2008

The district court did not clearly err in finding that the Government proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Holman had a conviction for carrying a concealed firearm. … Having found that Holman’s prior conviction was for carrying a concealed firearm, the district court did not err in finding that his prior conviction qualified as a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2.

Sandra Ramirez v. Walmart, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 25, 2024

her case,” and the court was careful to note Ramirez was not required to establish a prima facie case at the motion to dismiss stage. … suffered an adverse employment action; (3) she was qualified for the job; and (4) the employer treated employees “similarly situated in all material respects” outside of her protected class more favorably

Joiner v. General Electric Company

78 F.3d 524 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 27, 1996

On appeal, the Joiners reassert the admissibility of their expert testimony to establish causation. … A finding is clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.")

Albert Van Bilderbeek v. U.S. Department of Justice

416 F. App'x 9 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 14, 2011

The district court also did not clearly err in finding that the Administration had a plausible basis to investigate the Van Bilderbeeks. … The district court did not clearly err when it found that disclosure of the documents would “interfere with enforcement proceedings,” 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A).

Erickson v. Secretary for the Department of Corrections

243 F. App'x 524 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 2, 2007

A state court’s decision is contrary to clearly established Federal law if the state court: (1) arrives at a conclusion opposite to that reached by the Supreme Court on a question of law; or (2) decides a case differently … Stat. § 943.0435(2), a sexual offender must register with the sheriff’s office in the county in which he establishes a permanent residence within 48 hours of establishing that residence. Under Fla.

United States v. Willie Lee Daniels

554 F. App'x 885 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 10, 2014

“As rulings on motions to suppress involve mixed questions of fact and law, the district court's factual findings are reviewed under the clearly erroneous 2  Case … The facts giving rise to Daniel’s motion to suppress as established at the suppression hearing.

United States v. Calixte Simeon

463 F. App'x 874 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 30, 2012

We will not set aside the district court’s determination unless the facts in the record clearly establish that the defendant has accepted responsibility. United States v. … Among other examples of covered conduct, “providing materially false information to a probation officer in respect to a presentence or other investigation for the court” qualifies for an obstruction adjustment.

Guyana Telephone & Telegraph Co., Ltd. v. Melbourne International Communications, Ltd.

329 F.3d 1241 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 7, 2003

The contract between GT&T and AT&T is only relevant in helping to establish the market price for calls from the United States to Guyana. 2  Sometime before 1996, the … Therefore, for GT&T to prevail on its argument, the Florida legislature must have clearly intended retroactive application.

Janet L. Scotnicki v. Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama

631 F. App'x 896 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 10, 2015

To establish a prima facie claim of failure to accommodate under the Rehabilitation Act, Skotnicki must show that: (1) she was disabled; (2) she was a qualified individual; and (3) she was discriminated against by way of … Skotnicki bears the burden of identifying an accommodation and establishing that it was reasonable. Id. She points to four accommodations that she requested and that UAB failed to provide.

Joshua Jordan v. The Closet Factory Franchise Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 14, 2025

that it could not include Jordan’s alleged punitive damages when calculating the amount in controversy because Jordan did not demonstrate that the defendants committed “egregious” con- duct that qualified … We cannot say that the district court clearly erred in this finding. Next, we address Jordan’s asserted entitlement to civil pen- alties under the FDUTPA.

United States v. Antywan E. Bryant

398 F. App'x 561 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 5, 2010

For a defendant to show that his substantial rights were violated as a result of a sentencing error, he must establish that there is a reasonable 2 We need not decide whether the district court properly … A two-level reduction in a defendant’s offense level is appropriate where “the defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense.” U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a).

D. Robert Autrey, Jr., an Individual, Cross-Appellants v. United States of America, Cross-Appellee

889 F.2d 973 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 6, 1989

The IRS agent's misstatement of the department's intentions clearly misled Mr. Autrey, and to bind Mr. … Each investor clearly bought more than six cows.