In United States v. Thrush, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 118742 (E.D. Mich. 6/25/21), CL here, “Thrush was indicted on multiple counts of willfully failing to pay over payroll taxes and to file tax returns.” After being contacted by the CI agent, Thrush “began making payments on his tax liability” and filed tax returns. In the ensuing criminal case, the Government moved in limine “to exclude evidence of Defendant's delinquent tax payments and returns.”
The Court held that, under Sixth Circuit precedent, Thrush could introduce the evidence. After reviewing the case authority, the Court concluded (pp. 9-10):
Defendant's version of events, if believed, would allow a reasonable jury to infer that his failure to pay taxes and file tax returns was the result of ignorance, rather than willfulness. Accordingly, Defendant's [*10] delinquent filings, if offered in conjunction with the assertions discussed above, would be probative of his mental state during the period in question.
In comparison, evidence of the delinquent filings poses only a modest risk of misleading the jury. The evidence will not, and cannot, be offered to show that Defendant's prior crimes, if any, were somehow vitiated, see Sansone 380 U.S. at 354, and the jury will be clearly instructed as to the elements of the charged offenses and the meaning of willfulness.
Based on the foregoing, the Government has not demonstrated that the probative value of Defendant's delinquent filings is substantially outweighed by the risk of misleading the jury.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. Jack Townsend will review and approve comments only to make sure the comments are appropriate. Although comments can be made anonymously, please identify yourself (either by real name or pseudonymn) so that, over a few comments, readers will be able to better judge whether to read the comments and respond to the comments.