Defendant’s tax fraud conviction is affirmed where: 1) a rational jury could find that a fax sent by a participant in defendant’s investment program updating her contact information in anticipation of future payments was an important part of “lulling” participants into believing that defendant’s investment scheme was a legal, secure financial program; 2) defendant did not show that his behavior advising and advocating tax evasion to participants should be entitled to First Amendment protection; and 3) defendant was at the very least on notice that the IRS expected him to pay taxes on his income from the operation.
Read US v. Phipps, No. 08-10831
Appellate Information
Filed January 25, 2010
Judges
Opinion by Judge Garza
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
