E. M. Piper v. United States

Fifth Circuit

E. M. Piper v. United States

338 F.2d 1005

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedDecember 29, 1964

Docket21466_1

StatusPublished

This text of 338 F.2d 1005 (E. M. Piper v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

E. M. Piper v. United States, 338 F.2d 1005 (5th Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The appellant complains of a judgment of conviction on a two count misdemean- or indictment entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of wilfully and knowingly failing to file a manufacturer’s quarterly excise tax return on imported automobiles, and wilfully and unlawfully failing to pay such excise tax in violation of Title 26 U.S.C.A. § 7203. The chief contention of the defendant is that the evidence presented against him is not legally sufficient to sustain the convictions because, (a) the evidence shows that a quarterly excise tax return was filed for the period involved; (b) a failure of the evidence to show that such taxes were due and payable; and (c) there was not sufficient evidence to establish wilfulness.

Our review convinces us that there is no merit in the contentions of the defendant; the evidence amply supports the jury verdict of guilt; and the defendant received a fair and impartial trial. The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

The appellant complains of a judgment of conviction on a two count misdemean- or indictment entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of wilfully and knowingly failing to file a manufacturer’s quarterly excise tax return on imported automobiles, and wilfully and unlawfully failing to pay such excise tax in violation of Title 26 U.S.C.A. § 7203. The chief contention of the defendant is that the evidence presented against him is not legally sufficient to sustain the convictions because, (a) the evidence shows that a quarterly excise tax return was filed for the period involved; (b) a failure of the evidence to show that such taxes were due and payable; and (c) there was not sufficient evidence to establish wilfulness.

Our review convinces us that there is no merit in the contentions of the defendant; the evidence amply supports the jury verdict of guilt; and the defendant received a fair and impartial trial. The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

338 F.2d 1005, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-m-piper-v-united-states-ca5-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack