United States v. Sergio Gardea - 05/10/2018

Tax preparer found not guilty on all 30 counts of preparing false tax returns following a 2 week jury trial today. Mr Gardea was represented by Miami criminal tax lawyer David M. Garvin.

Taxpayer's Argument That the Indictment was Duplicitous Was Rejected, U.S. v. Greene, U.S. Dt. Lexis 32403 (N.D. OK. 2010)

U.S. v. Greene,  U.S. Dt. Lexis 32403 (N.D. OK. 2010)

    The record for this case demonstrates that on December 9, 2004, the Defendant was indicted on charges of tax evasion (Count 1) and subscribing to a false tax declaration (Count 2).

    The Defendant was tried by a jury from August 23, 2005, through September 1, 2005. On September 1, 2005, the jury returned guilty verdicts on both counts.

    On February 4, 2006, Defendant was sentenced to a total term of 70 months imprisonment. Defendant was also sentenced to a total term of 3 years supervised release. He was fined for a total of $ 500,000. Judgment and Commitment was entered on March 7, 2006.

    Defendant filed a direct appeal at the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Continuing to be represented by attorney Monroe, Defendant raised ten claims, among them, the indictment was multiplicitous and Count 1 was duplicitous because it charged both evasion of taxes and submitting a false declaration under oath, he was subjected to double jeopardy because he had been previously convicted of filing a false tax return for 1990, and the government breached the plea agreement entered into in 1996.

    On August 16, 2007, the Tenth Circuit rejected each of Defendant's claims, except his claim challenging the validity of the fine imposed by the trial court. On January 13, 2009, Defendant, appearing pro se, filed the 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion. He identified four grounds of error, including lack of subject matter jurisdiction predicated on

Defendant's alleged lack of taxable income for 1990 and 1991 tax years], and insufficient evidence to prove a deficiency or willfulness.

    Defendant stated that none of his four claims were raised on direct appeal due to ineffective assistance of counsel, but the government asserted that the claims were in fact raised on direct appeal.

    The government further asserted that Defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel as identified in the 2255 motion lacked merit and Defendant was not entitled to relief.

The Defendant's appeal was denied.

Tax Fraud Report
The Latest Criminal Tax Decisions, Selected Civil Tax Opinions and Related Economic Crimes.

Pingbacks

Pingbacks are closed.

Comments

Comments are closed.

All rights reserved the-tax-specialist.com 2017