Court Opinion

ID: 9889356
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-10 00:00:27.421229+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:38:46.817528
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10083         Document: 00516924523             Page: 1      Date Filed: 10/09/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-10083
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                                October 9, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Raymond Griggs,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Northern District of Texas
                                USDC No. 3:20-CR-87-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Willett, Duncan, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Raymond Griggs was convicted by a jury of one count of making a false
   statement on his income tax return, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1). He
   maintains that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his
   conviction. Because Griggs preserved his sufficiency challenge, our review
   is de novo. See United States v. Warren, 986 F.3d 557, 562 (5th Cir. 2021).

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10083        Document: 00516924523         Page: 2      Date Filed: 10/09/2023

                                     No. 23-10083

          To establish a violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1), the Government had
   to provide enough evidence for a reasonable jury to conclude that Griggs: (1)
   made and signed a “materially false” income tax return; (2) submitted a
   written declaration that the tax return was true and correct under penalties
   of perjury; (3) did not believe that the tax return was true and correct when
   he signed it; and (4) “signed it willfully and with the specific intent to violate
   the law.” United States v. Boyd, 773 F.3d 637, 644 (5th Cir. 2014). Griggs
   asserts that the evidence offered at trial did not establish that he signed, or
   directed anyone else to sign, his 2013 tax return at issue.
          The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the Government
   and with all reasonable inferences made in favor of the verdict, supported the
   conviction. See id.; United States v. Holmes, 406 F.3d 337, 351 (5th Cir. 2005).
   “To uphold the conviction, there is no requirement that the evidence
   exclude every possible hypothesis of innocence.” United States v. Zamora-
   Salazar, 860 F.3d 826, 832 (5th Cir. 2017) (internal quotation marks and
   citation omitted). The Government presented evidence that Griggs owned
   and operated a tax preparation business, that he had previously been audited,
   and that Griggs’s assistant helped him prepare his tax returns. It was thus
   reasonable for the jury to believe that he “would not let tax time come and go
   without either making and filing his own return or authorizing someone to do
   it for him.” United States v. Ponder, 444 F.2d 816, 822 (5th Cir. 1971). The
   jury was free to choose among the reasonable constructions of the evidence,
   which included those consistent with Griggs’s guilt. See Zamora-Salazar,
   860 F.3d at 832.
          Griggs further argues that because he did not “sign” the 2013 tax
   return, the Government could not prove that he willfully violated § 7206(1).
   To prove willfulness, the Government must show “that the law imposed a
   duty on the defendant, that the defendant knew of this duty, and that he
   voluntarily and intentionally violated that duty.” Boyd, 773 F.3d at 644

                                           2
Case: 23-10083        Document: 00516924523         Page: 3    Date Filed: 10/09/2023

                                     No. 23-10083

   (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In the context of a § 7206(1)
   conviction, this court has stated that “evidence of a consistent pattern of
   under reporting large amounts of income will support the necessary inference
   of willfulness.” United States v. Stokes, 998 F.2d 279, 281 (5th Cir. 1993).
   The evidence established that Griggs engaged in a pattern of under reporting
   large sources of his income on his tax returns for a period of years. As owner
   of a tax preparation business and because he had previously been audited, the
   jury could infer that Griggs was aware of the importance of his income tax
   returns being correct. It could also infer that he knew about the finances of
   his business and was aware that large portions of the gross receipts were not
   reflected on his tax returns. Accordingly, the record reflects that a jury could
   have plausibly found that the Government presented evidence that Griggs
   willfully engaged in a pattern of under reporting his income. See id.; Boyd,
   773 F.3d at 644.
          The evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom, viewed in the
   light most favorable to the verdict, supports that a rational trier of fact could
   have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Griggs willfully made false
   statements on his 2013 tax return. See Boyd, 773 F.3d at 644; Holmes, 406
   F.3d at 351. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                          3