Court Opinion

ID: 2681324
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2014-06-30 16:00:32.512443+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:41:10.702640
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
            For the Eighth Circuit
        ___________________________

                No. 13-2714
        ___________________________

            United States of America

       lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                          v.

                 Joshua Simonson

      lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
         ___________________________

                No. 13-2715
        ___________________________

            United States of America

       lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                          v.

Kristen Simonson, also known as Kristen Moody

      lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
                      ____________

     Appeals from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
                 ____________
                              Submitted: June 25, 2014
                                Filed: June 30, 2014
                                   [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
                        ____________

PER CURIAM.

       After a jury found Joshua and Kristen Simonson guilty of tax-fraud conspiracy
and related offenses, the District Court1 imposed sentence on both defendants, and
these consolidated direct criminal appeals followed. The Simonsons elected to
proceed pro se at trial, as they do in this appeal. And as they did below, they raise a
variety of arguments challenging the District Court’s jurisdiction and the
government’s right to bring and pursue the criminal charges against them, and they
base these arguments on their view, among others, that they are special, sovereign
citizens; that the federal statutes of conviction are invalid; that only “international
jurisdiction” is available; and that the government had a contract with them and
breached it.

      These arguments are frivolous, see United States v. Hart, 701 F.2d 749, 750
(8th Cir. 1983) (per curiam); United States v. Sterling, 738 F.3d 228, 233 n.1 (11th
Cir. 2013), cert. denied, 2014 WL 1621678 (May 27, 2014); and we affirm the
judgments before us without extended discussion.
                       ______________________________

      1
        The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.

                                         -2-