United States v. Sandia

How courts have described this case

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

• reviewing de novo “[t]he district court’s decision to deny the motion to dismiss [the indictment] based on defendant’s religious rights under RFRA[, ]a question of law”
• “[W]e are free to affirm a district court decision on any grounds for which there is a record sufficient to permit conclusions of law, even grounds not relied upon by the district court.” (alteration in original
• “[W]e are free to affirm a district court decision on any grounds for which there is a record sufficient to permit conclusions of law, even grounds not relied upon by the district court.” (alteration in original
• no evidence of prior criminal history

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).