United States v. John W. Flanagan, No. 30533 Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5th Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I

438 F.2d 1223
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 12, 1971
Docket1223
StatusPublished

This text of 438 F.2d 1223 (United States v. John W. Flanagan, No. 30533 Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5th Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I) 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
United States v. John W. Flanagan, No. 30533 Summary Calendar. Rule 18, 5th Cir. See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. Of New York, 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I, 438 F.2d 1223 (5th Cir. 1971).

Opinion

438 F.2d 1223

71-1 USTC P 9245

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
John W. FLANAGAN, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 30533 Summary Calendar.*
* Rule 18, 5th Cir.; See Isbell Enterprises, Inc.
v.
Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431
F.2d 409, Part I.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 2, 1971, Rehearing Denied April 12, 1971.

James R. Gillespie, San Antonio, Tex., for defendant-appellant.

Seagal V. Wheatley, U.S. Atty., Reese L. Harrison, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., San Antonio, Tex., Johnnie M. Walters, Asst. Atty. Gen., Meyer Rothwacks, Joseph M. Howard, Richard B. Buhrman, Attys., Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellee.

Before WISDOM, COLEMAN and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

John W. Flanagan was convicted of wilfully attempting to evade his federal income taxes for the years 1963 and 1964, in violation of 7201 of the Internal Revenue Code. On appeal, Mr. Flanagan complains only of the denial of a motion for a bill of particulars and the admission of a government exhibit (204).

As to the bill of particulars, the prosecution stated at the hearing on the motion that the government would rely on the omission of specific items of income, all of which were included in a thirteen page report which had been turned over to the defense. The denial of the bill of particulars was not in error, Demetree v. United States, 5 Cir., 1954, 207 F.2d 892, 894.

The complaint about the admission of the exhibit (checks written by the defendant) is likewise without merit.

The judgment of conviction must be, and is,

Affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
438 F.2d 1223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-john-w-flanagan-no-30533-summary-calendar-rule-18-5th-ca5-1971.