Eleventh Circuit· 3/24/2020

United States v. Marlon Eason

Citations

953 F.3d 1184

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing that Hobbs Act robbery satisfies the elements clause in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), but holding it does not satisfy the requirements of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4B1.2(a)(1)
explaining that St. Hubert is not binding in the guidelines context because § 924(c)’s “crime of violence” definition is different from the one in the career offender guideline
finding that a Guidelines calculation error was not harmless where the district court never “stated on the record that the enhancement made no difference to the sentence it imposed.” (quotation marks omitted) (alterations adopted)
noting that § 924(c)’s elements clause “reaches the use, attempted use, or threatened use of force against property” and that “[t]here is nothing incongruous about holding that Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence for purposes of . . . § 924(c)(3)(A
declining to apply Keene where district court “never stated on the record that the enhancement made no differ- ence to the sentence it imposed” (citation modified)
“[W]e . . . interpret the Guidelines as they currently exist.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.