Case law

United States v. Hormidas Torres-Arreaga

358 F. App'x 120 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 23, 2009

Defendants who are more than a minimal participant but less than a minor participant qualify for a three-level reduction. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. … The proponent of the downward adjustment bears the burden of establishing his role in the offense by a preponderance of the evidence.

Xianglan Cui v. U.S. Attorney General

561 F. App'x 797 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 28, 2014

court therefore issued an order of removal to China or, in the alternative, to South Korea.2 Cui petitioned the BIA for review of the IJ’s decision, arguing that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination was clearly … Thus, an alien who cannot meet the standard for asylum generally cannot qualify for withholding of removal or protection under CAT. See Forgue v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F.3d 1282, 1288 n.4 (11th Cir. 2005).

Positano Place at Naples III Condominium Association, Inc. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 31, 2023

Section 1292(a) creates a narrow exception from the “long- established policy against piecemeal appeals.” Gardner v. Westing- house Broad. Co., 437 U.S. 478, 480 (1978). … What it says, therefore, is that although the interlocutory order compels Empire to act (and is en- forceable by the contempt power), the order is unappealable under § 1292(a)(1) because to qualify

Positano Place at Naples IV Condominium Association, Inc. v. Empire Indemnity Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 31, 2023

Section 1292(a) creates a narrow exception from the “long- established policy against piecemeal appeals.” Gardner v. Westing- house Broad. Co., 437 U.S. 478, 480 (1978). … What it says, therefore, is that although the interlocutory order compels Empire to act (and is en- forceable by the contempt power), the order is unappealable under § 1292(a)(1) because to qualify

United States v. Domulest Danzey

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 14, 2021

Whether a co-conspirator’s act was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant so that it qualifies as relevant conduct for sentencing is a question of fact reviewed for clear error. United States v. … On this record, we cannot say that the district court clearly erred.

United States v. Timothy Tyrone Johnson

329 F. App'x 890 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 21, 2009

Ct. 1581 (2008), called into question the strict categorical approach that Taylor established, and that the result of Begay is to require that a property crime must involve a serious potential risk of physical injury. … constitutes a qualifying offense under the ACCA.

Xiang Feng Zhou v. U.S. Attorney General

290 F. App'x 278 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 18, 2008

Because he had not established a well-founded fear of persecution, he was not entitled to asylum. … The BIA did so because Petitoner had not shown that the IJ’s findings of fact, including the IJ’s rejection of the material parts of Petitioner’s testimony as not credible, were clearly erroneous.

United States v. Joseph DeRosa

544 F. App'x 830 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 22, 2013

We review findings of fact under the clearly erroneous standard and legal conclusions de novo. Id. … Therefore, further evidence that Derosa submitted accurate original documents or that Rodriguez had falsified pre-qualifying documents was not likely to contribute significantly to Derosa’s defense.

Ricky R. Banner v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections

659 F. App'x 1005 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 29, 2016

And the prosecutor remarked that Banner no longer qualified as a prison release reoffender so he faced a minimum sentence of 31.425 months. … A state prisoner is entitled to a writ of habeas corpus only if the state court reached a decision that was “contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(

United States v. Olanrewaju Etisan Oloruntoba

167 F. App'x 98 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jan 30, 2006

Thus, the court did not clearly err in finding that he had failed to meet either prong of the mitigating role test, and was thus not qualified for a minor-role reduction. See De Varon, 175 F.3d at 939; U.S.S.G. … To the extent that the court erred in holding, as a matter of law, that a drug courier can never qualify for a minor-role reduction, this error is harmless because appellant had otherwise failed to establish eligibility

Delmar Antonio Corrales-Hernandez v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 18, 2020

To adequately raise an issue on appeal, the party must “specifically and clearly identif[y] it in its opening brief; otherwise, the claim will be deemed abandoned and its merits will not be addressed.” Cole v. U.S. … Attorney General affirmed the BIA’s analysis of the required nexus between alleged persecution and the alleged protected ground, clarifying that most nuclear families are not inherently socially distinct and therefore do not qualify

Amy Murphy v. Secretary, U.S. Department of the Army

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 18, 2019

A qualified employee is one who is able to satisfy all of the job’s requirements, with or without accommodation. Southeastern Community College v. … It is a plaintiff’s burden to allege, with particularity, facts necessary to establish jurisdiction. Morrison v. Allstate Indem. Co., 228 F.3d 1255, 1273 (11th Cir. 2000).

Michael Earl Van Cleve v. U.S. Secretary of Commerce

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 24, 2022

At the pleading stage of a case, general factual allegations of injury can suffice, but these general factual allegations must plausibly and clearly allege an injury in fact. Muransky v. … Tangible injuries qualify as concrete. Trichell, 964 F.3d at 997.

Machelle Joseph v. Board of Regents of the University System of Geor

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 8, 2025

It “expressly abrogated States’ sov- ereign immunity against suits brought in federal court to enforce” Title IX. Id.; see 42 U.S.C. § 2000d-7. … Without further ado, the court considered whether the employee there had established a prima facie case of discrimination.

James Joseph Brown v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 7, 2014

Persons who qualify as career offenders are subject to a sentencing enhancement, which is laid out in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b). … The Act vested appointment power in the district courts and established minimum qualifications for magistrates,20 which included bar membership.

United States v. Devin LaShawn Jefferson, II

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 4, 2020

The government bears the burden of establishing that an error is harmless. United States v. Sweat, 555 F.3d 1364, 1367 (11th Cir. 2009). … Barragan, 793 F.2d 1255, 1259 (11th Cir. 1986) (holding that the government’s Rule 16(a) violation was harmless because the defendant’s “participation and role in the crime were clearly established” by other evidence at trial

Swaran Singh v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 2, 2019

To qualify for adjustment of status, an alien must demonstrate that he is admissible to the United States for permanent residence. INA § 245(a)(2), 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a)(2). … If an alien is an applicant for admission, he has the burden of establishing that he is “clearly and beyond doubt entitled to be admitted and is not inadmissible” under the INA.

Paramijit S. Virdi v. DeKalb County School Dist.

216 F. App'x 867 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 6, 2007

we did not “foreclose the possibility that an employment discrimination plaintiff who receives only injunctive relief may be entitled to 7 attorney’s fees where the plaintiff establishes … The plaintiff clearly need not show, to a mortal certainty, that he will definitely 10 apply for a contract in the future.

United States v. Hensel Joseph

229 F. App'x 904 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 13, 2007

BACKGROUND Hensel Joseph pled guilty to four counts of bank robbery in exchange for an oral agreement that the government would recommend sentencing at the low end of the range established by sentencing guidelines … Joseph also objected that paragraph 61 in the PSI, which listed his qualifying offenses for his career offender status, was in error.

Garcia-Celestino v. Ruiz Harvesting, Inc.

898 F.3d 1110 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 2, 2018

This occurred despite the fact that Consolidated Citrus established a thorough auditing process to monitor Ruiz Harvesting's finances. … Rul. 87-41, 1987- 1 C.B. 296 (setting forth Internal Revenue Service guidance on who qualifies as an "employee" under federal taxation legal framework).