Case Citator › United States v. Theodoropoulos

United States v. Theodoropoulos

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

Overruled in part
Court
Third Circuit
Citation
866 F.2d 587
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
37 of 37
Citing cases (total)
37
Treatment dates
1996
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. United States v. Theodoropoulos was overruled in part. After the Supreme Court clarified that using a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) requires active employment, the Third Circuit rejected Theodoropoulos's rule that an available gun could qualify as used.
More on how this was screened

That confirmed treatment is listed below. All 37 flagged citations have been read; later opinions continue to rely on its separate conspiracy, expert testimony, and ineffective assistance rulings.

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.

37 later cases cite United States v. Theodoropoulos; 37 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. Theodoropoulos?

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

Overruled in part

  • The Third Circuit overruled Theodoropoulos's rule that a firearm available to assist a crime qualifies as “used” under § 924(c).

    United States v. Price · Third Circuit · filed

    Bailey's interpretation of the "use and carry" provision demands a different inquiry from that required under Theodoro-poulos. It is no longer enough that the weapon be available to the defendant; rather, it must have played an active role in the perpetration of the predicate offense beyond emboldening the perpetrator. Therefore, we hold that the district court's instruction to the jury, while accurately reflecting the law of the Third Circuit at the time, was erroneous in light of Bailey. Furthermore, to the extent that our holding in Theodoropoulos conflicts with the Supreme Court's interpretation of "use" in Bailey, Theodoropoulos is overruled.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Theodoropoulos 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