United States v. Derwin Fritts
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
The Ninth Circuit disagreed with its Florida robbery holding in United States v. Geozos (2017), but the Supreme Court later held in Stokeling v. United States that Florida robbery qualifies under the Armed Career Criminal Act. The Ninth Circuit then recognized in Ward v. United States (2019) that Geozos cannot be reconciled with Stokeling. Other courts continued to apply Fritts's robbery holding and its rule that a panel remains bound by circuit precedent.
53 later cases cite United States v. Derwin Fritts; 53 of those citations 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 United States v. Derwin Fritts?
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 53 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 United States v. Derwin Fritts 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