Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John D. STANTON, III, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-09-22
Citations: 579 F. App'x 982
Docket Number: No. 13-13671
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John D. STANTON, III, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before HULL, MARCUS and HILL, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 579
Pages: 982–983

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John D. STANTON, III, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-13671.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
Sept. 22, 2014.
Linda Julin McNamara, Arthur Lee Bentley, III, Robert Monk, Matthew J. Mueller, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Judy K. Hunt, Law Office of Judy K. Hunt, St. Petersburg, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HULL, MARCUS and HILL, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
After a jury trial, John Stanton, III appeals his convictions and sentences for obstructing the administration of the internal revenue laws (Count One), 26 U.S.C. § 7212(a) and 18 U.S.C. § 2; failing to timely file a corporate income tax return for Denouement Strategies, Inc. (Counts Two and Three) and for Florida Engineered Construction Products Corporation (Counts Four, Five, and Six), 26 U.S.C. § 7203; and failing to timely file an individual income tax return (Counts Seven and Eight), id.
On appeal, Stanton raises the following issues: (1) whether sufficient evidence supported his conviction on Count One for corruptly endeavoring to impede or obstruct the administration of the internal revenue laws; (2) whether he was unconstitutionally convicted under § 7212(a) based on lawful conduct, or, alternatively, whether that statutory provision is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad; (3) whether sufficient evidence supported his convictions on Counts Four through Six for failing to file corporate tax returns; (4) whether cumulative error deprived him of a fair trial; and (5) whether the district court imposed a procedurally and substantively reasonable sentence.
After review and oral argument, we conclude that all of the issues in this appeal lack merit, and thus affirm Stanton's convictions and sentences.
AFFIRMED.