United States v. Arthur D. Ward

833 F.2d 1538
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedJanuary 19, 1988
Docket87-3271
StatusPublished
Cited by37 cases

This text of 833 F.2d 1538 (United States v. Arthur D. Ward) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Arthur D. Ward, 833 F.2d 1538 (11th Cir. 1988).

Opinion

*1539 PER CURIAM:

Arthur D. Ward was convicted of three counts of tax evasion (26 U.S.C. § 7201), and two counts of making false statements or claims to a federal agency. 18 U.S.C. § 1001. Ward makes three arguments on this appeal. First, he suggests that the United States has jurisdiction over only Washington, D.C., the federal enclaves within the states, and the territories and possessions of the United States. Secondly, he interprets the term “individual” within the Internal Revenue Code to apply only to those individuals located within this jurisdiction of the United States. Ward reaches this twisted conclusion by misinterpreting a portion of the Income Tax Code. The 1918 Act defined the words “state” or “United States” to “include” United States territories and the District of Columbia; Ward asks this court to interpret the word “include” as a term of limitation, rather than of definition. Finally, Ward maintains that the only persons expressly and statutorily liable for income tax are the withholding agents of nonresident aliens and foreign corporations.

We find each of appellant’s contentions to be utterly without merit. The district court properly denied Ward’s motions for acquittal, and properly refused to instruct the jury as to Ward’s theory of his defense. The opinion of the district court is

AFFIRMED.

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

Related

Greer v. United States
M.D. Florida, 2025
Aubrey Maurice Garrett v. Internal Revenue Service
694 F. App'x 761 (Eleventh Circuit, 2017)
Batsch v. Comm'r
2016 T.C. Memo. 140 (U.S. Tax Court, 2016)
Michael Balice v. Commissioner of Internal Reven
634 F. App'x 349 (Third Circuit, 2016)
Bennett v. Comm'r
2014 T.C. Memo. 256 (U.S. Tax Court, 2014)
Hill v. Comm'r
2013 T.C. Memo. 265 (U.S. Tax Court, 2013)
Robert W. Herriman v. Commissioner of IRS
521 F. App'x 912 (Eleventh Circuit, 2013)
Nix v. Comm'r
2012 T.C. Memo. 304 (U.S. Tax Court, 2012)
David Roy Callihan v. Commissioner of IRS
490 F. App'x 327 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
Nelson v. Comm'r
2012 T.C. Memo. 232 (U.S. Tax Court, 2012)
United States v. Jason W. Bennett
448 F. App'x 991 (Eleventh Circuit, 2011)
Morgan v. United States
419 F. App'x 958 (Eleventh Circuit, 2011)
Tinnerman v. Comm'r
2010 T.C. Memo. 150 (U.S. Tax Court, 2010)
United States v. John Korman
373 F. App'x 922 (Eleventh Circuit, 2010)
United States v. Evangelos Lena
370 F. App'x 65 (Eleventh Circuit, 2010)
Pate v. Comm'r
2008 T.C. Memo. 272 (U.S. Tax Court, 2008)
United States v. Cowan
535 F. Supp. 2d 1135 (D. Hawaii, 2008)
United States v. Milton Hargraves Baxley, II
228 F. App'x 901 (Eleventh Circuit, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
833 F.2d 1538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-arthur-d-ward-ca11-1988.