-30-
4. if admitted to prove intent, the other acts must be
similar to the offense charged. See United States v. Ayers,
supra at 1472-1473; United States v. Spillone, 879 F.2d 514, 518-
520 (9th Cir. 1989).
The first two parts of this test are obviously satisfied,
because the parties have stipulated that the "other acts"
occurred, and petitioner's fraudulent intent is clearly material
to this case. In our judgment, the other two parts are satisfied
as well.
In United States v. Ayers, supra, the taxpayer made
incorrect or false declarations to U.S. Customs in Nassau,
Bahamas, concerning the amount of cash he was transporting.
These declarations were made in 1987. The trial court admitted
the declarations as relevant evidence in the prosecution of the
taxpayer for conspiracy to defraud the United States and evade
taxes, even though the conspiracy had ended in 1985. The Court
of Appeals upheld the conviction, reasoning that it was not error
to admit the Bahamian declarations under rule 404(b) of the
Federal Rules of Evidence. According to the Court of Appeals,
the taxpayer's subsequent acts of concealing large amounts of
cash were probative of the taxpayer's earlier intent to defraud
the United States in the collection of taxes, by concealing his
income or net worth. See United States v. Ayers, supra at 1473-
1474.
In this case, there is no evidence that petitioner made any
false or incorrect statements concerning the Bahamian bank
Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011