green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
12.4 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2007 ·
…hen a person pays a cashier a dollar for a cup of coffee in the courthouse cafeteria, the customer has not used the coffee. he has only used the dollar bill
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Watson v. United States
(2×)
hen a person pays a cashier a dollar for a cup of coffee in the courthouse cafeteria, the customer has not used the coffee. he has only used the dollar bill
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Reed v. Thomas
In Stewart, the court held that in light of Bailey the “receipt of a gun during a drug transaction is not an offense under § 924(c).” Smith, 285 F.3d at 7 (citing Stewart, 246 F.3d at 733).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Cotto
His interpretation of the word “use” has some force given the common understanding of that term: while it is easy to see how he “used” the heroin to get the guns, it is somewhat less natural to say that he “used” the guns as well. 3 See Stewart, 246 F.3d at 731; Westmoreland, 122 F.3d at 435-36 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. James D. Sumler, A/K/A Chew, A/K/A Smoke James D. Sumler
After reviewing Smith and Bailey , the Court reasoned that “[t]he [defendant] has not employed the gun, availed himself of the gun, or derived any service from the gun by simply trading his drugs for it. [A] seller does not use a buyer’s consideration.” Stewart, 246 F.3d at 731 (internal quotations omitted). *583 In United States v. Warwick, 167 F.3d 965 (6th Cir.1999), the Court concluded that by accepting a weapon offered by an undercover agent, a defendant does not actively do anything because his conduct is inherently passive.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re: Smith
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
This court, in turn, held in Stewart that merely “receiving” a gun during a drug transaction is not active employment because the “recipient has not employed the gun, availed himself of the gun, or derived any service from the gun by simply trading his drugs for it.” Stewart, 246 F.3d at 731.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Jason Cox (A/k/a \Jc\") and Clinton Cox
See United States v. Stewart, 246 F.3d 728 , 731 (D.C.Cir.2001) (“[A] person who receives a gun in a trade for drugs has not used the gun in violation of § 924(c).”); United States v. Warwick, 167 F.3d 965, 975-76 (6th Cir. 1999); United States v. Westmoreland, 122 F.3d 431, 435 (7th Cir.1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Van Nguyen
See, e.g., United States v. Harris, 959 F.2d 246, 254 (D.C.Cir.1992), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Stewart, 246 F.3d 728 (D.C.Cir.2001); United States v. Hicks, 945 F.2d 107, 108-09 (5th Cir.1991) (per curiam); United States v. Hernandez-Escarsega, 886 F.2d 1560, 1571 (9th Cir.1989); United States v. Hall, 843 F.2d 408, 410-11 (10th Cir.1988); United States *900 v. Fernandez, 822 F.2d 382, 384-85 (3d Cir.1987); United States v. Ricks, 802 F.2d 731, 737 (4th Cir.1986) (en banc); United States v. Schuster, 769 F.2d 337, 345 (6th Cir.1985); United States v. Young, 745 F.2d 733, …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
United States
v.
Stewart, Maurice
v.
Stewart, Maurice
00-3033.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
May 4, 2001.
246 F.3d 728
Published
Citer courts: Supreme Court (2)
United States Court of Appeals for the district of columbia circuit
No. 00-3033 September Term, 2000
United States of America, Filed On: May 1, 2001 Appellee v. Maurice Leo Stewart, Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 91cr00593-03)
Before: Williams, Sentelle and Rogers, Circuit Judges.
O R D E R
It is ORDERED, by the Court, sua sponte, that the Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge Sentelle on May 1, 2001, be, and hereby is, amended as follows:
On page 9, in the ninth (9th ) line of the first full paragraph the word "not" should be inserted between the words "does" and "mean."
FOR THE COURT: Mark J. Langer, Clerk