Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-15-02052/USCOURTS-ca7-15-02052-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Scott Bodley
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals 

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted February 2, 2017*

Decided February 3, 2017

Before

DIANE P. WOOD, Chief Judge

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

No. 15‐2052

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff‐Appellee,

v.

SCOTT BODLEY,

Defendant‐Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.

No. 3:13CR00052‐001

Barbara B. Crabb,

Judge.

O R D E R

Scott Bodley appeals from the judgment in a criminal case that ended his

multi‐year, obstreperous campaign to impede IRS collection efforts. After a three‐day

trial at which Bodley represented himself (he had fired both of the lawyers appointed to

represent him after they refused to answer his 52‐question “Voir Dire for Attorney”), a

jury found him guilty of obstructing the IRS, 26 U.S.C. § 7212(a), creating phony money

orders, 18 U.S.C. § 514(a)(2), submitting false tax forms to the IRS, id. § 1001(a), filing a

                                                 

* We have agreed to decide this case without oral argument because the briefs and record adequately

present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not significantly aid the court. See FED. R.

APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).   

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

Case: 15-2052 Document: 78 Filed: 02/03/2017 Pages: 2
No. 15‐2052    Page 2

false tax return, 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1), and tax evasion, id. § 7201. The government had

established that Bodley sent the IRS fake money orders totaling over $70 million, filed 58

fraudulent tax returns in a single year, falsely claimed on IRS forms that then‐Treasury

Secretary Henry Paulson was his fiduciary, submitted to the IRS $2.8 million in fake

bonded promissory notes as “tax payments” for other delinquent taxpayers (whom he

charged for his “services”), filed false IRS forms purporting to document $70 million in

unreported income received by IRS employees, and sent threats to a federal judge, a

federal prosecutor, and IRS employees. The district court sentenced Bodley to a total of

78 months’ imprisonment—well below the guidelines range of 121 to 151 months, and

ordered him to pay roughly $32,000 in restitution.

We initially appointed counsel to represent Bodley, but again he fired his attorney

and insisted that we let him continue to represent himself. After filing numerous

baseless motions, he tendered an appellate brief that is entirely frivolous. Bodley argues

that his 26 convictions must be overturned due to the loss of “highly relevant material

informational documentational evidence”—i.e., trial transcripts. But the record contains

full transcripts of his trial, as Bodley must know, since the clerk of this court mailed him

more than 1,000 pages of transcripts. Bodley also argues that he received ineffective

assistance of standby counsel (the second attorney appointed by the district court to

represent him), forcing him “to do battle alone and unarmed.” This assertion is meritless

because a defendant who exercises his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself does

not have a right to standby counsel, let alone effective standby counsel. See Simpson v.

Battaglia, 458 F.3d 585, 597 (7th Cir. 2006).   

Bodley’s remaining assertions consist of shop‐worn tax‐protestor arguments that

courts have consistently rejected for over a century. For example, Bodley argues that he

is not a U.S. citizen, but a “direct individual beneficiary to the Constitutional Compact

Trust,” and therefore not subject to federal jurisdiction; that the entire federal criminal

code is unconstitutional; that federal judges and prosecutors collude to obtain

convictions in tax prosecutions for which, Bodley says, they receive a $40,000 bounty for

each person convicted; and that the district court erred by refusing his request for

personal financial records from each government employee involved in his prosecution

in order to prove such collusion. We have rejected as “unbelievably frivolous” similar

tax‐protestor arguments countless times. See United States v. Collins, 510 F.3d 697, 698

(7th Cir. 2007); see also, e.g., United States v. Cooper, 170 F.3d 691, 691 (7th Cir. 1999). And,

were this a civil case, Bodley would face a presumptive $4000 sanction for filing this

frivolous appeal. See United States v. Patridge, 507 F.3d 1092, 1096 (7th Cir. 2007); Szopa v.

United States, 460 F.3d 884, 887 (7th Cir. 2006). The judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED.   

Case: 15-2052 Document: 78 Filed: 02/03/2017 Pages: 2