United States v. Paul Singer

Second Circuit

United States v. Paul Singer

241 F.2d 717

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 5, 1957

Docket284, Docket 24410

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 241 F.2d 717 (United States v. Paul Singer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second 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. Paul Singer, 241 F.2d 717 (2d Cir. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from concurrent sentences imposed by Judge Bootle on a jury verdict of guilty on three counts of transportation of stolen motor vehicles in interstate commerce. It was conceded that the vehicles were stolen and that they were transported by appellant in interstate commerce. The sole issue, knowledge by appellant that they were stolen, was decided against appellant by the jury.

Appellant claims that admission in evidence of his income tax return was plain error which may be noticed under F.R.Cr.P. Rule 52(b), 18 U.S.C. He makes the claim in spite of a statement by his counsel at the time, of no objection to its admission. He bases the claim on a contention that such use of returns is prohibited by the Internal Revenue Code. We find no error in the admission of the return. The use of the return in such litigation, pursuant to regulation, is contemplated by the statute I.R.C. 1939, Sec. 55(a) (1), 26 U.S.C. § 55 (a) (1), and is sanctioned by Treasury Regulation T.C. 4945, 26 C.F.R. 458.204, continued in effect by the 1954 I.R.C. Sec. 7807, 26 U.S.C. § 7807. The manner of its use, for the purpose of impeachment, was proper. United States v. Lowe, 3 Cir., 234 F.2d 919, certiorari denied 352 U.S. 838, 77 S.Ct. 59, 1 L.Ed. 2d 56.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from concurrent sentences imposed by Judge Bootle on a jury verdict of guilty on three counts of transportation of stolen motor vehicles in interstate commerce. It was conceded that the vehicles were stolen and that they were transported by appellant in interstate commerce. The sole issue, knowledge by appellant that they were stolen, was decided against appellant by the jury.

Appellant claims that admission in evidence of his income tax return was plain error which may be noticed under F.R.Cr.P. Rule 52(b), 18 U.S.C. He makes the claim in spite of a statement by his counsel at the time, of no objection to its admission. He bases the claim on a contention that such use of returns is prohibited by the Internal Revenue Code. We find no error in the admission of the return. The use of the return in such litigation, pursuant to regulation, is contemplated by the statute I.R.C. 1939, Sec. 55(a) (1), 26 U.S.C. § 55 (a) (1), and is sanctioned by Treasury Regulation T.C. 4945, 26 C.F.R. 458.204, continued in effect by the 1954 I.R.C. Sec. 7807, 26 U.S.C. § 7807. The manner of its use, for the purpose of impeachment, was proper. United States v. Lowe, 3 Cir., 234 F.2d 919, certiorari denied 352 U.S. 838, 77 S.Ct. 59, 1 L.Ed. 2d 56.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 F.2d 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-paul-singer-ca2-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack