Legal Opinion

United States v. Quaintance

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided April 15, 2008No. 07-2137, 07-2140PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MURPHY, Circuit Judge.

Defendants Joseph Allen Butts, Danuel Dean Quaintance, and Mary Helen Quain-tance were indicted for conspiracy to possess and possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. 1 The defendants moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing the prosecution constituted a substantial burden on the exercise of their religion in violation of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (“RFRA”). 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb-2000bb-4. The district court denied the motion and granted the government’s motion in limine barring the defendants from raising a RFRA defense at trial. The defendants filed…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
  2. Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Digital Equipment Corp. v. Desktop Direct, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Flanagan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. United States v. WellsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2017
  2. United States v. WamplerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
  3. United States v. QuaintanceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
  4. United States v. TuckerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2014
  5. United States v. Timothy AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API