Opinion ID: 583188
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Refusal To Dismiss The Indictment

Text: 16 Valdez claims that evidence of his business expenses was clearly exculpatory evidence which would have created a serious question as to whether or not the Grand Jury would have indicted the appellant for tax evasion. He claims it was prosecutorial misconduct not to submit this evidence to the second Grand Jury. 17 There is no basis in the law for Valdez' assertion that the record of his expenses was clearly exculpatory. The court's instruction explains the law: 18 A person is required to file a return if his gross income for the calendar years 1983 and '84 exceeded $3,300, and for 1985 exceeded $3,430, even though that person may be entitled to deductions from that income so that no tax is due. 19 RT 2/12/91 at 754, lines 20-25. There was no evidence before the Grand Jury or at trial that Valdez' income in 1983, 1984, or 1985 was below the minimum necessary to trigger the statutory filing requirement or that he had not made false statements, both of which trigger the violation of section 7201.