There was an interesting—if unresolved—application of this during the 2020 grand jury shutdown. Does an unconsented information (e.g. no GJ) properly institute proceedings sufficient to trigger the savings clause? Or because the information was a nullity does it not count? From the saga of Dr. Gatz

FYI it appears this case was not on the oral argument calendar. As a matter of routine, non argument cases are not published and are (except in unusual cases) per curiam in the Eleventh Circuit.

(Unless practice has dramatically changed in the last couple years)

Same group? Is that a pistol being pointed at the guy in blue?