Opinion ID: 682235
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Proper Sentencing Guideline for 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7212(a)

Text: 11 The Koffs were convicted of violating 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7212(a), which prohibits corrupt activity designed to obstruct or impede the due administration of the federal tax laws. The Statutory Index to the 1989 Sentencing Guidelines Manual, which the district court applied in sentencing the Koffs, designated U.S.S.G. Sec. 2A2.2, Aggravated Assault, and Sec. 2A2.3, Minor Assault, as the appropriate guidelines for violations of 26 U.S.C. Sec. 7212(a). Because the Koffs' crimes did not involve actual violence against I.R.S. agents or property, the district court properly determined that these guidelines were not appropriate, and that it should look to the most analogous guideline to the Koffs' conduct to determine their sentence. See, e.g., United States v. Hanson, 2 F.3d 942, 947 (9th Cir.1993). 12 Relying on United States v. Dykstra, 991 F.2d 450 (8th Cir.), cert denied, 114 S.Ct. 222 (1993), the district court found Sec. 2J1.2, Obstruction of Justice, with a base offense level of 12, to be most analogous. Hanson, a Ninth Circuit case decided several weeks before the Koffs were sentenced, found instead that Sec. 2T1.5, Fraudulent Returns, Statements, or Other Documents, with a base offense level of 6, was the most analogous guideline in another Sec. 7212(a) case. 2 F.3d at 947. After receiving briefs on this question, we now conclude that the district court properly applied Sec. 2J1.2. 13 Whether a particular guideline applies to a specific set of facts is a question of law reviewed de novo. Hanson, 2 F.3d at 947. Because the Koffs did not object to the district court's determination of their sentences, however, we review only for plain error. United States v. Martinez, 956 F.2d 891, 893 (9th Cir.1992). 14 Hanson involved a scheme similar to the one employed by the Koffs. Hanson filed false forms 1099 and 1096, claiming to have made payments of over $78,000,000; he then filed a form 1040, falsely claiming a refund of almost $34,000,000. Hanson, 2 F.3d at 944-45. Hanson was convicted of violating Sec. 7212(a), among other laws, and the district court sentenced him under guideline Sec. 2T1.9, Conspiracy to Impair, Impede, or Defeat Tax. This court reversed, finding the conspiracy guideline inappropriate because Hanson acted alone, and concluding without argument that Sec. 2T1.5 applied to Hanson's conduct. Id. at 947. We find that under the facts of the present case, however, the district court correctly applied the general obstruction of justice guideline, Sec. 2J1.2. 15 In Hanson, the targets of the false documents scheme were not IRS officials and were apparently not involved in any sort of legal proceeding against Hanson. The only effect on the IRS in that case was the administrative burden of detecting, investigating and prosecuting the offender. 16 By contrast, the Koffs began their scheme shortly after receiving a deficiency notice from the IRS for the tax years 1982-85, and after the agency began collection proceedings. They specifically targeted and attempted to intimidate IRS officials whom they believed were involved in the proceedings against them, from the acting Commissioner all the way down to the caseworker working on the Koffs' cases. In addition, they attempted to use the fake refunds they claimed the IRS owed them directly to offset the tax liability the IRS had assessed for 1982-85. 17 Such conduct goes beyond the misdemeanor offense contemplated by guideline Sec. 2T1.5, Fraudulent Returns, Statements, or Other Documents. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 2T1.5, comment. (backg'd) (1989). Instead, the Koffs engaged in obstruction of justice, and we agree with the conclusion of the Eighth Circuit in Dykstra, 991 F.2d at 454, on virtually identical facts, that Sec. 2J1.2 was the appropriate guideline. The district court therefore did not err in sentencing the Koffs.