Case Citator › United States v. Victor Machado, Miguel Angel Victorero, Edgardo Rafael Manotas, Fernando Gaviria-Aguirre

United States v. Victor Machado, Miguel Angel Victorero, Edgardo Rafael Manotas, Fernando Gaviria-Aguirre

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

Superseded by statute
Court
Eleventh Circuit
Citation
804 F.2d 1537
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
44 of 44
Citing cases (total)
44
Treatment dates
1989
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. United States v. Machado's former unlawful-possession requirement under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) was superseded by statute. All 44 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The one confirmed treatment is listed below: the Eleventh Circuit held that Congress removed “unlawfully” from § 924(c), so unlawful possession is no longer an element of that offense. Later courts continued to apply Machado's separate severance and prior-panel rules.

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.

44 later cases cite United States v. Victor Machado, Miguel Angel Victorero, Edgardo Rafael Manotas, Fernando Gaviria-Aguirre; 44 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. Victor Machado, Miguel Angel Victorero, Edgardo Rafael Manotas, Fernando Gaviria-Aguirre?

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.

Treatments

Superseded by statute

  • Congress's removal of “unlawfully” from § 924(c) ended Machado's requirement that the firearm possession also violate another law.

    United States v. Poole · Eleventh Circuit · filed

    Machado was decided under the earlier version of section 924(c)(2), which provided, “Whoever ... carries a firearm unlawfully during the commission of any felony ...” (emphasis added). In passing the current version of section 924(c)(1), Congress omitted the word “unlawfully.” Thus, violation of a federal, state, or local law is no longer an element of a section 924 offense.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Victor Machado, Miguel Angel Victorero, Edgardo Rafael Manotas, Fernando Gaviria-Aguirre 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