Case law

United States v. Samuel Roy Abram

171 F. App'x 304 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 20, 2006

“Thus, [f]or Bruton to apply, a codefendant’s statement must be clearly inculpatory standing alone.” Id. … Under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b), a defendant qualifies for a two-level reduction to his offense level if he was a minor participant in the offense. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b).

United States v. Jhon Yandry Quijije-Mero

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 3, 2025

(n.5). 6 The defendant bears the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that he is entitled to a minor-role reduction. United States v. … confirms that the district court considered each defendant’s lengthy arguments about a minor-role reduction and considered the totality of the circumstances in determining that each of them did not qualify

Andrew Spear v. Milton E. (Buddy) Nix, Jr.

215 F. App'x 896 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 29, 2007

McGhan Medical Corp., 184 F.3d 1300, 1317 n.17 (11th Cir. 1999) (“Issues that are not clearly outlined in an appellant’s initial brief are deemed abandoned.”). … Establishment of a parole system does not automatically create a liberty interest in parole; “[o]nly when a state maintains a parole system that creates a legitimate expectation of parole does it [also] establish a liberty

Juan Maximiano Ochoa Artega v. U.S. Attorney Gen.

364 F. App'x 614 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 10, 2010

The BIA determined that his submitted evidence did not show clearly that he had been abused by his spouse. … Finally, Daysi’s failed attempt to obtain a protective order against Ochoa-Artega does not establish that Ochoa- Artega was a battered spouse.

In Re United States

743 F.2d 827 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 3, 1984

When Satterfield later took off his mask, Callaway could see his face, but because it was dark she could not see it very clearly. 5 At 4:30 or 5:00 a.m., the three men took Callaway to a shack rented by Satterfield, at which … Sec. 17-14-13 (Michie 1982) 10 For example, courts will be called upon to determine the class of persons who can qualify as "victim[s] of the offense" under subsection 3579(a)(1).

Hilton v. Secretary for the Department of Corrections

170 F. App'x 600 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 1, 2005

immunity. … It is well-established that issues not raised in the district court will not be considered on appeal. See Narey v. Dean, 32 F.3d 1521, 1526-27 (11th Cir. 1994) (setting forth five exceptions to this rule).

United States v. William R. Beamon, Jr.

678 F. App'x 883 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 2, 2017

When a defendant challenges one of the factual bases of his sentence, the government has the burden of establishing the disputed fact by a preponderance of the evidence. See United States v. … 2B1.1(b)(1)(H) (2014). 1 Where a fraud involves a mortgage loan and the property has not been disposed of, the court uses the fair market value of the collateral as of the date on which the guilt of the defendant was established

Port Terminal & Warehousing Company, a Georgia Corporation and McKinney International Forwarders, Inc., a Georgia Corporation v. John S. James Co., D.J. Powers Co., Inc., Thomas C. James, William Earnest Carter, Port Terminal & Warehousing Company, Etc. v. John S. James Co.

695 F.2d 1328 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 17, 1983

Allen McKinney, owner of same has somehow qualified as a licensed Foreign Freight Forwarder. The name of this new firm is McKinney Forwarding Company. … Eaton: It has come to our attention that your agent in Savannah, Georgia has established itself as a licensed foreign freight forwarder.

Castel v. Commissioner of Social Security

355 F. App'x 260 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 30, 2009

“A clearly articulated credibility finding with substantial supporting evidence in the record will not be disturbed by a reviewing court.” Id. at 1562 (citation omitted). … The ALJ’s decision establishes a clear record of the reasons why Castel’s testimony was not credible.

FDIC v. Greenview Apartments, Ltd.

157 F.3d 1292 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 1998

We therefore conclude that a trial is required to establish what the facts are. … The court in Intercontinental concluded that section 1821(d)(6)(A) clearly indicated Congress’ intent to apply FIRREA to pending judicial actions. See id. at 1282-83.

FDIC v. Greenview Apartments, Ltd.

157 F.3d 1292 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 16, 1998

We therefore conclude that a trial is required to establish what the facts are. … That court noted: The statute clearly requires that each creditor file a claim.

Doug Jones v. John Rutherford

546 F. App'x 808 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 19, 2013

Summary judgment is appropriate against a party that “fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at … Jones does not clearly articulate how Jacksonville is the “moving force” behind the officer’s alleged deliberate indifference.

Mike Ruple v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance

340 F. App'x 604 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 11, 2009

Ruple has failed to establish that the parties’ previous settlement bars the instant lawsuit. … The policy involved in this case clearly requires “[o]bjective medical findings which support [the claimant’s] Disability.

United States v. Derrick Williams

271 F. App'x 968 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 31, 2008

However, Williams objected to the use of his juvenile conviction for aggravated battery with a deadly weapon as a qualifying offense because the commitment document did not clearly define the dangerous weapon as a firearm … He asserts that, in the absence of any proof such as a plea agreement, court finding, or an admission, the district court failed to establish that he had been adjudicated guilty of an offense involving a firearm.

RMS Titanic, Inc. v. Kingsmen Creatives, LTD.

579 F. App'x 779 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 2, 2014

Century Arts, Ltd., 94 F.3d 623, 628 (11th Cir. 1996) (holding that making phone calls from Canada to Florida did not qualify as carrying on a business venture in Florida). … Federal courts clearly have the power to order jurisdictional discovery, and we have held that the exercise of that power “is not entirely discretionary.” Eaton v.

United States v. Cedric Gray

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 9, 2019

The Sentencing Guidelines make clear that items such as BB guns and items that closely resemble a real gun qualify as “dangerous weapons” but not as “firearms.” See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.1 cmt. n.1(D); id. cmt. n.1(G). … In light of that testimony, we cannot say that the district court clearly erred in determining that the gun in this case was real.

Juana Maria Portillo-Bautista v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 6, 2020

She maintained that she met all four prongs to establish that she was eligible for asylum. … Factual 3 Additionally, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s findings in the alternative that, even if credible, Portillo-Bautista did not establish she qualified for asylum or other relief.

Stewart J. Smith v. United States

7 F.4th 963 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 29, 2021

The standard of care is the level at which similarly qualified medical professionals, including doctors and nurses, would have managed the care under the same or similar circumstances. 6 The letter … Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, an Article I court established by the VJRA. Id. §§ 7251, 7252(a), 7266(a). Decisions of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims are in turn appealable only to the U.S.

Maria Emma Salmeron-Hernandez v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 15, 2022

dismissed Salmeron-Hernandez’s appeal, finding: (1) no clear error in the IJ’s factual findings; (2) the IJ correctly concluded that the threats to Salmeron-Hernandez did not amount to persecution; and (3) the IJ did not clearly … Therefore, we assume for the purposes of this petition that both groups qualify as particular social groups without resolving the issue.

Jose L. Salgado-Escamilla v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 30, 2021

unusual hardship to his only qualifying relative: his eight-year-old son. … Clearly, the Board did not abuse its discretion in finding that Salgado-Escamilla’s second motion to reopen was both untimely and number-barred. B.