- 2 -
two exhibits, namely: (1) A grand jury indictment (Indictment)
of petitioner and Andrew Winslow Willis, and (2) petitioner's
plea agreement (Plea Agreement) to the charges contained in the
Indictment. The Court ordered petitioner to respond to
respondent's motion on or before November 19, 1996. Petitioner
failed to do so.
The Court must decide whether petitioner is collaterally
estopped from contesting that deficiencies in his income taxes
for the years at issue were due to fraud within the meaning of
section 6653(b) on account of his plea of guilty to a violation
of section 7201. We hold he is. Unless otherwise stated,
section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for
the years in issue. Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules
of Practice and Procedure. Dollar amounts have been rounded to
the nearest dollar.
Background
Petitioner petitioned the Court to redetermine respondent's
determination of deficiencies of $168,198 and $32,696 in his 1979
and 1980 Federal income taxes, respectively, and $84,099 and
$16,348 additions to those respective taxes under section
6653(b). Petitioner resided in Texarkana, Texas, when he
petitioned the Court.
Petitioner was a defendant in the criminal case United
States v. Lahodny, which was docketed in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of California. In connection with this
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011