Case Citator › United States v. Marc Milton Leachman

United States v. Marc Milton Leachman

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

Abrogated
Court
Sixth Circuit
Citation
309 F.3d 377
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
67 of 67
Citing cases (total)
67
Treatment dates
2013
Abrogated
A reviewed court treats this case as abrogated by later authority. United States v. Marc Milton Leachman was abrogated as to its rule allowing a judge to find a fact that raises a mandatory minimum sentence. All 67 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

Leachman relied on Harris v. United States for that rule, and the Supreme Court overruled Harris in Alleyne v. United States. In United States v. Hunter, an August 13, 2013 order of the Southern District of Ohio expressly said Alleyne overruled Leachman to the extent it relied on Harris. Leachman's separate guilty plea waiver holding rests on a different ground. The partial abrogation is listed below. The retrieved texts of United States v. Robert Johnson, Jr., United States v. Burkholder, and United States v. Charles Washpun contain no identifiable citation to Leachman. All three opinions were read and provide no basis for an adverse treatment entry.

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.

67 later cases cite United States v. Marc Milton Leachman; 67 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. Marc Milton Leachman?

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

Abrogated

  • Alleyne overruled the Harris rule on which Leachman relied for judicial findings that increase mandatory minimum sentences.

    Alleyne v. United States · Supreme Court of the United States · filed

    Because there is no basis in principle or logic to distinguish facts that raise the maximum from those that increase the minimum, Harris was inconsistent with Apprendi. It is, accordingly, overruled.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Marc Milton Leachman 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