Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-04224/USCOURTS-ca10-91-04224-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
Cause of Action: 

---

F IL .. . .J l 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPE~ States Cop-tof Appea f 'fenth Crrcuit 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

) 

Plaintiff-Appellee, ) 

) 

V. ) 

) 

DAVID R. JENSEN, ) 

) 

Defendant-Appellant, ) 

) 

and ) 

) 

CELIA N. JENSEN, BARBARA JEAN) 

JENSEN KEISTER, ) 

) 

Defendants. ) 

DEC 2 9 1992 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No . 91-4224 

(D.C. No. 90-C-151-A) 

{D. Utah) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before MOORE, TACHA, and BRORBY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not mate rially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

34 {a ); 10th Cir. R. 34.1 . 9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Defendant -Appellant Daryl R. Jensen, with his wife, Celia 

Jensen, and his daughter, Barbara Keiste r , appeals prose the 

judgment of the United States District Court for the District o f 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, o r used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except f o r purposes of establishing the d octrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral est oppel. 1 0th Cir. R. 

3 6. 3. 

Appellate Case: 91-4224 Document: 010110154902 Date Filed: 12/29/1992 Page: 1 
Utah reducing federal tax assessments to judgment and setting 

aside the transfer of Jensen's residence as a fraudulent 

conveyance. We exercise jurisdiction under 28 U. S.C. § 1291 and 

affirm. 

Mr. Jensen failed to pay federal income tax from 1981 through 

1985 . The Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") issued certificates of 

assessments showing that Jensen owed tax liabilities for those 

years. In 1983, Jensen transferred by warranty deed his only 

valuable property -- real property located at 5507 Karma Avenue in 

West Valley City, Utah -- to his wife and daughters . This 

property thereafter was transferred twice more, ultimately being 

owned by Celia Jensen and Barbara Keister as joint tenants. All 

individuals involved explained that these transfers, lacking any 

consideration whatsoever, were made to avoid probate and thus were 

legitimate exercises in estate planning. 

On February 15, 1990, the IRS brought suit to reduce the tax 

assessments t o judgment and to set aside the various 1983-1985 

conveyances of Jensen's Karma Avenue residence under Utah Code 

Ann. § 25-1-7 (1969). The IRS prevailed on both items. Jensen 

makes the following arguments on appeal: (1) his trial attorney 

rendered ineffective assistance of counsel; (2) the government 

failed to establish certain facts necessary for jurisdiction over 

tax assessments; and (3) the district court erred by determining 

that the conveyances of Jensen's property were fraudulent. 

First, we find Jensen's ineffective assistance claim to be 

without merit. Jensen clearly had no Sixth Amendment right to 

counsel in these civil proceedings, see MacCuish v. United States, 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-4224 Document: 010110154902 Date Filed: 12/29/1992 Page: 2 
844 F.2d 733, 735 (10th Cir. 1988), and we can find no authority 

for a Fifth Amendment right to counsel under these circumstances, 

see Father & Sons Lumber & Bldg. Supplies v. NLRB, 931 F.2d 1093, 

1097 (6th Cir. 1991 ) . Thus, Jensen cannot complain about the 

competence of his chosen counsel in this case. 

Second, we find that the government satisfactorily 

established the necessary jurisdictional elements in this case. 

Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7401, "[n]o civil action for the 

collection or recovery of taxes . . shall be commenced unless 

the Secretary authorizes or sanctions the proceedings and the 

Attorney General or his delegate directs that the action be 

commenced." Pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7403(a), the government may 

subject property to the payment of tax when directed by the 

Attorney General or his delegate, at the request of the Secretary. 

In the Pretrial Order entered November 20, 1990, the parties 

stipulated that the action was "brought at the direction of the 

Attorney General of the United States and at the request of the 

Chief Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service, a delegate of the 

Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to Sections 7401 and 7403 of 

the Internal Revenue Code." 

"Generally, facts agreed to by the parties to litigation and 

established by pretrial order, are to be considered facts on the 

trial, without further evidence, and may be modified at the trial 

only to prevent manifest injustice." United States v. Sommers, 

351 F.2d 354, 357 (10th Cir. 1965); see Fed. R. Civ. P . 16(e). 

Jensen does not argue that the government could not have offered 

the necessary jurisdictional facts into evidence, only that it did 

- 3 -

Appellate Case: 91-4224 Document: 010110154902 Date Filed: 12/29/1992 Page: 3 
not do so. Certainly, no manifest injustice arises out of the 

reliance on stipulated facts where those facts would have been 

proffered but for their stipulation. Although the parties cannot 

create federal jurisdiction by consent, they clearly can -- and in 

this case did -- stipulate to the facts needed to support a 

legitimate basis for federal jurisdiction. We therefore reject 

Jensen's jurisdictional challenge. 

Third, we find that Jensen has waived any argument regarding 

the fraudulent conveyance issue. "Appellate procedure requires 

that an appellant's brief shall contain an argument with 

appellant's contentions with respect to the issues presented, and 

the reasons therefor, with citations to the authorities, statutes 

and parts of the record relied on." Jordan v. Bowen, 808 F.2d 

733, 736 (10th Cir. 1987); see Fed. R. App. P. 28(a) (4). Jensen's 

brief contains the following analysis: 

On October 8, 1991, the District Court found that 

the transfer of the subject property should be set aside 

as a fraudulent conveyance. Jensen's [sic] contends 

that the District Court erred by ruling that the 

transfer of property was a fraudulent conveyance. 

Therefore the District Court judgment should be 

reversed. 

Because this argument is completely devoid of any substantive 

discussion or analysis, even the liberal construction afforded pro 

se briefs cannot save this issue from a finding of waiver. 

AFFIRMED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. 

-4-

ENTERED FOR THE COURT 

Deanell Reece Tacha 

Circuit Judge 

Appellate Case: 91-4224 Document: 010110154902 Date Filed: 12/29/1992 Page: 4