Document: 361 U.S. 416 80 S.Ct. 481 4 L.Ed.2d 412 William R. FORMAN, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 43. Argued Nov. 19, 1959. Decided Feb. 23, 1960. Solomon J. Bischoff, Portland, Or., for petitioner. Abbott M. Sellers, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Justice CLARK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 In this criminal conspiracy case, petitioner raises questions double jeopardy. Petitioner and one Seijas, his former partner in pinball business, were convicted1 to commit offense willfully attempting evade individual income taxes Seijas wife, violation § 145(b) Internal Revenue Code 1939,2 furnishing false books, records, financial statements officers employees Treasury Department purpose concealing true tax liabilities 18 U.S.C. 1001, U.S.C.A. 1001.3 The trial was prior our decision Grunewald v. United States, 1957, 353 391, 77 963, 931. requested, judge included charge, language similar that given charge prosecution directing should be acquitted unless jury found partners entered into a subsidiary conspiracy, continuing within six years indictment, conceal their attempt Seijas' wife's taxes. At time appeal, had come down. Citing Grunewald, Court Appeals reversed petitioner's conviction remanded case with instructions enter judgment acquittal. 259 F.2d 128. On rehearing, however, decided 'the might have been tried' on an 'alternative theory,' namely, 'certain overt acts listed indictment charged occurred 1948, 1951 1952, involving statements, could well furtherance during having as its objective not concealment conspiractors' but evasion.' 261 181, 183. It modified original order acquittal new trial. then contended once ordered acquittal, Appeals, by trial, violated command Fifth Amendment no person shall 'be subject same offence twice put jeopardy life or limb.' Petitioner's motion rehearing denied. 264 955. We granted certiorari. 359 982, 79 942, 3 932. affirm 2 facts are detailed 128, it is sufficient here merely summarize them. 1941 lawyer, formed partnership engage operation machines Kitsap County, Washington. Receipts, less expenses, from machines, divided equally between location owners. Beginning 1942 until December 1945, robbed extracting 'holdout' money those located at more profitable locations. These sums, without being split owners, partners. None these amounts books partnership, nor they returns. maintained diaries kept record amount he received, paid it. During period, returns omitting filed each year. 'there abundant proof' participation 'evade through 1945' period. also 'numerous statements' made both Forman six-year period immediately indictment. (9 Cir., 130.) shows, indicated, continued soon before which turned over agents covering receipt 1942—1945. submission, submitted theory expounded 233 556, main may implied circumstantial evidence showing latter secret. This would make timely under applicable statute limitations. But pointed out reversal after gave 'an advantage * court did have' required 'with directions appellant' Forman. rehearing,4 here, Government essence November 1953, least five committed return furthering eavde. Contrary what found, said end filing 1943 1946, embraced subsequent efforts, 1947 only flaw contrary, claimed, erroneous 'subsidiary conspiracy' instruction, now points injected therein himself. concluded interests justice entry rather than Although finding conceded 'that impermissible read alleging "to violate records making such employees, share unreported (holdout) liability Amador A. Seijas." page 182. held past returns' certain conspirators' Id., It, therefore, 'so provide cause trial.' Ibid. raised plea jeopardy, basis petition here. He says correctly ended last 1946. Since there direct existence crime evade, concludes, should, sustained acquit ground. When erred failing grant motion, argues him vested right matured so moved court. A contends, therefore place jeopardy.5 'inadvertence' allowed 'impermissible theory' condemned opinion, pages 399 406, 971—974; led error request instruction theory, compounded failure object thereto. resulted, maintains, saddled onto correct charge. view complication, concludes based either appropriate I. 5 believe misconstruction scope alleged duration present case. 'to fix' cases conspirators. That alleges comprehended investigation *.' Did when 'no prosecution' rulings issued, charged, 'or part agreement done pursuant thereto?' effect if agreement, timely. appeared us central obtain rulings, immunize taxpayers completely evasion. supported theory. said, that, since adequately jury, affirmed. 6 extending wife Unlike allege objects specifically extended 1953 and, 33 some late year language, must admitted, certainly lends strong support Government's 'was consummated' 1945 'a taxes, 'verdict guilty.' differs little one. fact appears patterned we believe, indicated i.e., principal 1942—1945, inclusive, income. attained filed. As first step process continue evasion succeed. action thereon barred permanently effected. regard, actually revealed time. covered requested given. There proven. possible confusion resulting, entirely ordered. raising ground asserting power error. 7 insists, fatal difference jury. Even agreed point, do relevant conclusion. tax. infected clearly Its inclusion ambiguous 'such further proceedings just circumstances,' believed 'appropriate,' 28 2106, concedes taken upon submission; judgment, lost amend direction him, says, think not. II. 8 elementary law can tried second has set aside appeal. States Ball, 1896, 163 662, 672, 16 1192, 1195, 41 L.Ed. 300. See Green 355 184, 189, 78 221, 224, 199, expressly affirmed principle Ball does rule because lack evidence, 'matured' remedies. Bryan 1950, 338 552, 560, 70 317, 321, 94 335, where seeks conviction, 'assigning number errors including denial trial." though claim respect portion dealing limitations, still fail. Under full go beyond particular relief sought. other cases, supra. Nor Sapir 1955, 348 373, 75 422, 99 426, require different conclusion, claims. there, 10 216 722, holding insufficient convict, dismiss later, instead newly discovered evidence. dismissed one, refused pass presented 9 While contends Appeal Sapir, incorrect. Here record. out, 'The simply properly instructed.' 956. hand, insufficiency cured introduction assured available. Moreover, District Court, while motion. decisive factor Sapir's concurring 374, 423. Furthermore, revise questioned Sapir. overlooks opened up appealing subjected himself appellate 'appropriate' thought 'just circumstances.' revision rehearing. interlocutory mandate ever issued thereon. never became final Banking, State Nebraska Pink, 1942, 317 264, 63 233, 87 254. 'operates suspend finality court's pending determination whether alter adjudication rights parties.' 266, 234. To hold otherwise deprive file certiorari favorably defendant attacked prohibited appeal tantamount verdict hands review cannot subscribe 11 Affirmed. 12 HARLAN, concurring. 13 I feel necessary add few words clear join Court's judgment. 14 1. fairly viewed subsidiary-conspiracy For although passages proceeded continuing-conspiracy passages, taking whole, are, my view, too justify saying understood consider basis. 15 2. omission give precluded, Rule 30 Federal Rules Criminal Procedure, U.S.C.A., point provides: 'No party assign any therefrom thereto retires verdict, stating distinctly matter grounds objection.' 17 application Accepting, do, include favor. requires favored 931, yet available parties court, undoubtedly sides. culpable challenging requesting constitute cross-appeal. not, seek result favorable itself reached court; rather, opposed contended. 3. sustains contention limitations.* retrial solely appealed because, circumstances disclosed record, 2106. Green, cited 486, establish turn defendant, suggest distinction. 19 4. express permissible sufficiency adduced prove continuation. Those resolved proceedings. 20 WHITTAKER, 21 desire word. CLARK'S clear, full, accurate statement demonstrates nearly everyone lower courts except Government; 22 Petitioner, conspiracy,' nevertheless asked, induced very words, him. neither obtained amounted virtual acquit. And obedience acquitted, would, course, Therefore, petitioner, inducing got much entitled law. Yet, claimed unsupported outright reversal. adequate took view. seems plain me asked far to, invited error, benefited , surely heard attack prejudicial especially when, quite plain, Government. realize profit decrying spent transaction, resist observing obvious, circumstances, affirmance 23 After written reversing, Government, effort salvage saying, effect: 'Perhaps, objecting accused, opportunity retry case.' forced contention, accordingly complains this, urging 'acquitted' try again Amendment's prohibition against me, totally devoid merit. rendered remanding complaining thankful pleaded guilty testified '§ 145. Penalties. (b) Failure collect pay tax, defeat Any chapter collect, account for, imposed chapter, who fails truthfully attempts manner payment thereof, shall, addition penalties provided law, felony fined $10,000, imprisoned years, both, together costs prosecution.' 26 1001. Statements entries generally. 'Whoever, jurisdiction department agency knowingly will-fully falsifies, conceals covers trick, scheme, device material fact, makes false, fictitious fraudulent representations, uses writing document knowing contain fictious entry, $10,000 both.' true. applied wrong (the theory). theory.' urges established regardless nature 'direct show among conspirators act concert cover up, own self-protection, traces commission.' 404, 973. (Emphasis supplied.) statement, reference conceal, decide proper limitations independent concealment, there. 409, note 976. Appeals' sustain concealment. 132—134, say erroneous. post-trial memorandum assigned routine fashion relied plus admission relevant.

Category: 0