Case Citator › United States v. Moore

United States v. Moore

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

Declined by some courts
Court
Eleventh Circuit
Citation
541 F.3d 1323
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
72 of 72
Citing cases (total)
72
Treatment dates
2010
Declined by some courts
At least one reviewed court has declined to follow this case. No reviewed court has overruled it. United States v. Moore was declined by the Tenth Circuit on whether a departure to the crack-cocaine guideline range permits a sentence reduction. All 72 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The confirmed treatment is listed below; later Eleventh Circuit opinions continued to apply Moore's rule to sentences whose career-offender guideline range remained unchanged.

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.

72 later cases cite United States v. Moore; 72 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. Moore?

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

Declined to follow

  • The Tenth Circuit rejected Moore's conclusion that a career offender who received a departure to the crack-cocaine guideline range could qualify for a sentence reduction, because a departure does not change the applicable guideline range.

    United States v. Darton · Tenth Circuit · filed

    Mr. Darton relies heavily on the Second Circuit’s decision in United States v. McGee, 553 F.3d 225 (2d Cir. 2009), and the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in United States v. Moore, 541 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 2008), in support of his argument that his sentence is “based on” § 2D1.1. Neither of those cases, however, fully analyze § 1B1.10(a)(2)(B)’s instruction that a sentence reduction is authorized only when the amendment at issue lowers the defendant’s “applicable guideline range.” ... Thus, the Second and Eleventh Circuit’s failure to address this issue renders both decisions unpersuasive.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads United States v. Moore 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