Case Citator › In re: Marckson Saint Fleur

In re: Marckson Saint Fleur

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Good law
Court
Eleventh Circuit
Citation
824 F.3d 1337
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
34 of 34
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. In re Saint Fleur is good law: all 34 flagged citations have been read, and none adversely treated its holding on completed Hobbs Act robbery. The Eleventh Circuit continued to hold that completed Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)'s elements clause after United States v. Taylor addressed attempted robbery.
More on how this was screened

Nearby references to abrogation concern other decisions or different offenses. A Justice's statement accompanying a denial of certiorari criticized the court's use of successive petition rulings as precedent, but the Supreme Court did not adopt that view.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

34 citations to In re: Marckson Saint Fleur sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on In re: Marckson Saint Fleur?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 34 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads In re: Marckson Saint Fleur and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace