Document: 381 U.S. 214 85 S.Ct. 1365 14 L.Ed.2d 345 Max JABEN, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 347. Argued March 9, 1965. Decided May 17, Rehearing Denied Oct. 11, See 86 19. Morris A. Shenker, St. Louis, Mo., for petitioner. Nathan Lewin, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of Court. 1 The statute limitations on felony willfully attempting to evade federal income taxes requires Government obtain an indictment that offense within six years date its commission, with proviso: 2 '* * Where a complaint is instituted before commissioner United States period above limited, time shall be extended until which 9 months after making States. *' Internal Revenue Code 1954, § 6531. 3 On April 15, 1963, day six-year was expire, filed against petitioner Jaben charging him filing false return year 1956. Commissioner determined showed probable cause believing had committed offense, and, at Government's request, issued summons ordering appear preliminary hearing 1963. continued 22, request Attorney, and without objection by never held since, grand jury superseded procedure returning Jaben, one count covered 1956 attempted evasion charged. not returned normal limitation period, but if valid purpose bringing nine-month extension into play, then timely. moved dismiss pertaining 1956, arguing insufficient because it did show he offense. Both trial court Court Appeals Eighth Circuit rejected this claim, 333 F.2d 535. We granted certiorari, 379 878, 150, 13 85, resolve conflict v. Greenberg, 320 467, decided Ninth Circuit, in identical based virtually complaint, accepted. For reasons follow we agree affirm judgment. I. 4 Under interpretation 6531, relevant complaint's ability initiate period. Section 6531 provides brought play '(w)here States' (supra, pp. 215-216). Rule Federal Rules Criminal Procedure defines as 5 written statement essential facts constituting It made upon oath or other officer empowered commit persons charged offenses States.' 6 Since stated tax Commissioner, contends regardless adequacy any purposes, triggering whether cause. would, thus, totally ignore further steps required 5.1 Indeed follows from position once having need pursue all, event defendant pressed obtained dismissal could nonetheless rely 7 do accept interpretation. Its effort look solely requirements would deprive institution independent meaning might rationally have led Congress fasten method initiating extension. Commissioner's function, view, merely rubberstamp complaint. seeks give his role importance version pointing out administer oath, receive make sure (a requirement met charge words statute); surely these matters are essentially formalities. argument ignores fact basic functions under judgment exists warn defendants their rights. Furthermore, beyond 3, there no provision notifying has been extended. (Indeed, reach find must who offense.) Notice criminal usually achieved service arrest warrant provided 4. Neither appropriate absent shows cause, form notice specified Rules. 8 More basically, evident statutory afford opportunity indict offenders session end This confirmed immediate precursor present section 'until discharge next district.' I.R.C.1939, 3748(a).2 Clearly meant grant greater case result accomplished simply nine months), rather intended deal situation cannot schedule. does reflect intention, safeguard whatever prevent when made, using it. better view extension, adequate begin effectively process prescribed sufficient justify process—those hearing. To so satisfy think proceed through affording 5, unless held, supersedes indictment. reflects insuring reasonable following either will decide bind over action, itself indict. A vitiate 10 In superseding took place. adopted satisfied 4, particular standard come cut off later complaint.3 turn question II. read follows: 11 'The undersigned complainant, being duly sworn, states: 12 'That Special Agent Service performance duties imposed law, conducted investigation liability calendar examining said taxpayer's years; identifying interviewing third parties whom taxpayer business; consulting public private records reflecting income; knowledge financial condition. aforesaid investigation, complainant personal about 16th April, 1957, Kansas City, Missouri, Western District unlawfully wilfully attempt defeat due owing America causing Director fraudulent return, wherein taxable $17,665.31, amount thereon sum $6,017.32, $40,001.76 owed $14,562.99. '(Signed) David Thompson 15 'Special 16 'Internal 17 'Kansas Missouri.' 18 Petitioner argues basically indistinguishable found wanting Giordenello States, 357 480, 78 1245, 1503. part: 19 sworn That January 26, Houston, Texas Southern Texas, Veto receive, conceal, etc., narcotic drugs, to-wit: heroin hydrochloride unlawful importation; violation 174, Title 21, Code. 20 'And states believes —4 material witnesses relation charge.' 21 complaints here materially distinguishable. Information alleging commission crime falls two categories: (1) information which, true, directly indicate charged, (2) relates source incriminating information. gave whatsoever. e.g., 'A saw narcotics B's possession,' statute, even incomplete, supplemented 'on Houston.' If were barren, 16, return.' fact, dollars-and-cents figures amounts allegedly should actually returned. As sources, affiant indicated he, official capacity, personally course examined returns years, interviewed business others condition, consulted conclusion investigation. 22 Beyond substance distinction nature Some subject putative establishment blunt concise factual allegations, whereas B file return' mean very much case. Establishment grounds belief often reconstruction many individually unrevealing susceptible unlike informants, example, whose credibility may suspect, sources less likely produce untrustworthy Thus, some supporting concerning informants cases common garden varieties required, such necessary context us. 23 supra, Aguilar 378 108, 84 1509, 723, established magistrate neutral resort justified. provide foundation affiant's answer magistrate's hypothetical question, 'What makes you charged?' complaining witness. There difference between disbelieving requiring basis allegations. Obviously reliance allegations necessarily entails degree source. See, Johnson 10, 13, 68 367, 368, 92 L.Ed. 436. Nor each allegation puts forth independently documented, every contributed conclusions spelled Compare Ventresca, 380 102, 741, 684. enough presented enable charges capricious sufficiently supported process. 24 instance issue comes down given petitioner's instead $17,665.31 reported. type can physically observed. only familiar Holland 348 121, 75 127, 99 150. Here affiant, Service, swore just thereafter actual income. circumstances, justified accepting agent's what 'saw' bring court, list total items unreported otherwise explain how calculated. 25 conclude challenged time-barred. 26 Affirmed. 27 WHITE, BLACK joins, concurring 28 rejects contention fulfilling suffices trigger provisions extending limitations. holds also probable-cause 5. instituted' Assuming 'complaint' satisfying well affords Court's holding 'dismissal extension,' ante, 220, though unequivocal my nothing Government. 29 Because I supplied determination existed, deem unnecessary consider contemplates establishing compliance 3. 30 GOLDBERG, THE CHIEF JUSTICE DOUGLAS join, part dissenting part. 31 tolling us, evidenced language legislative history, avoid penalizing indicted sitting expires. keeping purpose, ought allowed prepared expiration convenes, take advantage prepare ready submission believe Court, therefore, quite correct rejecting meets formal toll effect, allow additional Rather, tolls begins 32 begun all preindictment detailed taken. Only rquired 'to it' say assurance extend normally does, namely, starts motion. speedy disinterested magistrate—the Commissioner—that presentation expired. Thus join insofar those start machinery motion leading 33 lead me conclude, however, outlined followed, scheduled requires. person arrested taken immediately informed rights, examination determine promptly thereafter. Mallory 354 449, 454, 77 1356, 1479. determines custody pending action warranted. Even free bond still necessary, maintain exists. While issued, than warrant, longer arrested, nor post bond, special circumstances involving repose, important expedition similar bond. prompt serves check beginning prosecution that, sound practice, consistent policy hold secure certain evidence showing hand And, exceptional case, where late surely, order serve same promptness summons, issued. 34 accordance government's wishes, returnable days later, subsequent postponed week. schedule 36 expires, prosecution, 'reasonable time' says required. waived right promptly. Whatever burden move accelerate fixed ex parte application Government, unjust apply waiver concept here. Until today authoritative construction conjunction Rules, entitles issuance summons. basis, concluding petitioner, silent knowingly consciously existed. 35 hearing, requires, since fulfill Rule, institute proper pre-indictment procedure. Code, barred. III. reaches issue, express disagreement withits conclusion. means directing search place physical restraint, us fails demonstrate clearly meet standards laid 1250, 1503, 723. 37 finding 'probable cause' 'neutral detached' 'assess(es) probability (an accused) charged.' 486—487, (Emphasis added.) stated, 38 support judge himself persuasiveness relied He complainant's mere sought crime.' Id., 486, 1250. 39 exists; more reliable accused believed crime. 114, 1514, 'be underlying circumstances' recently reaffirmed 746, swear, agent here, investigations understated income, remove function hands agent. 40 affidavit revenue interviews persons—and concludes Without slightest indication examinations revealed, impossible detached magistrate' set obtained, but, Aguilar, indicated. 41 excuses setting Surely, net worth theory otherwise—are entitled defendants. impossible, difficult, perusal books persons. But 42 true 'it difficult understand expected assess require state ultimate conclusion, based. none met. reverse Appeals. 4(a) provides: 'If appears it, authorized law execute Upon attorney government issue. response issue.' 5(c) waives examination, forthwith district court. waive hear time. cross-examine introduce own behalf. court; him. introduced laws 1884 way amendment bill providing proposing floor Senate, Senator Hoar stated: 'As already said, purports point districts year, concealed, discovered meet, amendment: "Provided, sTates 'I that.' Cong.Rec. 5771. change 1954. accepts our likening incarcerated awaiting 5(c). reject Although interpreted intent, greatly overplays intent invest effectuate sense urgency thought attend prisoner. fully protect unreasonable delay moving advancement objecting postponements. objection, appellate review objected scheduling 1479, hearings 5(c), 5(a) 'without nearest available commissioner' apprised So original.

Category: 0