Case law

United States v. Manuel Reyes

279 F. App'x 802 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 28, 2008

Defense counsel objected to the PSI and argued that Reyes’s role as a transporter qualified him for a two-level, mitigating-role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. … Because the district judge did not clearly err in denying Reyes a mitigating-role reduction, his sentence is AFFIRMED. 9

Dr. Jasmine Younge v. Fulton Judicial Circuit District Attorney's Office, Georgia

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 1, 2025

A district court abuses its discretion when it applies an incorrect legal standard, relies on clearly erroneous factual findings, or commits a clear error of judgment. Bradley v. … USCA11 Case: 23-11418 Document: 41-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2025 Page: 10 of 30 10 Opinion of the Court 23-11418 the liberal pleading rules established

United States v. Bryan Acosta

323 F. App'x 751 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 16, 2009

The probation officer responded that Acosta did not qualify for safety-valve relief “because he has not yet truthfully provided to the government all information and evidence that he has concerning the offense.” … In this case, the district court did not clearly err by finding that Acosta failed to provide all of the information and evidence that he had regarding his offenses.

United States v. Randall Scott Anderson

509 F. App'x 868 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 14, 2013

The district court did not clearly err in finding that the enhancement for obstruction of justice was warranted by Anderson’s perjury at trial. … The party challenging the sentence has the burden to establish that the sentence is unreasonable. Talley, 431 F.3d at 788.

Mamma Mia's Trattoria, Inc. v. The Original Brooklyn Water Bagel Co. Inc.

768 F.3d 1320 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Sep 30, 2014

On the other hand, courts have recognized modifications when new orders clearly changed the reach of an existing injunction. See, e.g., R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. v. … Nevertheless, Congress established the false marking qui tam action that permitted Mamma Mia’s representative suit.

Harold Sequiera v. U.S. Attorney General

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Oct 26, 2007

He also argues that he presented sufficient evidence to establish the extreme hardship requisite to a waiver of inadmissibility. … Because the record clearly demonstrates that Sequiera had a full and fair opportunity to present evidence and the to testify, we DENY his due process claim.

United States v. Charles Tomlin

501 F. App'x 864 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 12, 2012

A victim is a person “directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of an offense,” 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(a)(2), and the government can qualify as a victim of a crime for restitution purposes. … “Where a district judge clearly states that he would impose the same sentence, even if he erred in calculating the guidelines, then any error in the calculation is harmless.” United States v.

United States v. Charles Raymond Stagner

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jul 26, 2019

A defendant who enters a not guilty plea makes intent a material issue, which the government may prove by qualifying Rule 404(b) evidence. … Under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, a defendant’s offense level is decreased by two levels if he clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a).

United States v. Jerry Hall

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 27, 2019

Because we hold that the district court’s factual findings are not clearly erroneous, we affirm. … In the district court, the Government has the burden to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that an enhancement is applicable. See United States v. Kinard, 472 F.3d 1294, 1298 (11th Cir. 2006).

United States v. Todd Erling Becker

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Feb 19, 2019

To establish plain error, the defendant must show (1) an error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affected his substantial rights. Id. at 1276. … As for Becker’s argument that the district court clearly erred in finding, as part of its probable cause analysis, that Bolonka saw a mask and bandana in the van before he arrested Becker, we do not address it because the

Claude McQueen v. Alabama Department of Transportation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Apr 23, 2019

Further, an appellant should clearly identify any issues that he wishes for us to address on appeal, and his statement of the issues on appeal should reference the grounds for the district court’s rulings. … of a protected class; (2) he was subjected to an adverse employment action; (3) the employer treated similarly situated employees who were not members of the plaintiff’s class more favorably; and (4) the plaintiff was qualified

Mark Allen Geralds v. Attorney General, State of Florida

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 12, 2021

Under AEDPA, then, this rule was not clearly established, and the state court’s decision was not contrary to law. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). … Thus, these statements are not clearly established federal law. See Lockyer, 538 U.S. at 71–72.

Arthur D. Weiss v. City of Gaineville, Florida

462 F. App'x 898 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Mar 21, 2012

Policy 2.3.8 established standards for the property’s development. Policy 2.3.8(m) provided: m. … This document clearly did not promise Weiss a future development of regional impact hearing. D.

United States v. Alberto Trejo

624 F. App'x 709 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Aug 24, 2015

. § 4B1.1, due to two prior qualifying felony convictions (murder and transporting marijuana for sale), which pushed his criminal history category from V to VI, see U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b), resulting in a guideline range of … When the hearing resumed, the court denied the motion for a downward variance because Trejo had not established a “record here that supports a rejection of the policy.”

Sheffield v. United Parcel Service

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 22, 2010

To qualify for this exception a plaintiff must show that “(1) the relied upon charge is not invalid, and (2) the individual claims of the filing and non-filing plaintiff arise out of similar discriminatory treatment in … Sheffield argues, however, that in Hipp we established an exception to the general forward temporal scope where the representative charge “clearly alleges a continuing, concrete policy that is illegal, such as in McDonald

United States v. Johnny Hodges

334 F. App'x 214 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Jun 15, 2009

Based on the undisputed statements contained in these paragraphs of the PSI, together with the facts contained in the plea agreement, a preponderance of the evidence established that Hodges knew of or reasonably foresaw … A defendant is entitled to a two-level reduction if he “clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for his offense.” U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a).

United States v. Alejandro Ramos Bertel

160 F. App'x 958 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 30, 2005

Because Bertel had a prior criminal history, the probation officer found that he did not qualify for a § 5C1.2 safety-valve reduction. No adjustment was given for Bertel’s role in the offense. … The district court did not clearly err in refusing to grant Bertel a mitigating- role adjustment.

Shirley M. Johnson v. Airbus Defense & Space Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · May 26, 2021

A prima facie claim for sex discrimination under Title VII requires a plaintiff to show that: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she was subjected to an adverse employment action; (3) she was qualified for the … The employer must clearly explain the reasons for its actions but need not persuade the court that it was actually motivated by its proffered reasons. Tex. Dep’t of Cmty. Affairs v.

United States v. Anthony Reid

256 F. App'x 317 · Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Nov 28, 2007

“A district court’s determination that a defendant is not entitled to [a reduction for] acceptance of responsibility will not be set aside unless the facts in the record clearly establish that a defendant has accepted … Accordingly, the district court did not clearly err in finding that 10 Reid did not meet his burden of establishing that he had accepted personal responsibility. 6.

John W. Wood, Jr. v. John Kelly

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · Dec 14, 2017

As we have established, Wood’s underlying claims are time barred. … Story, 225 F.3d 1234, 1240–42 (11th Cir. 2000) (holding that federal judges are entitled to “absolute immunity” from suit).