-13-
1651 (2000). Petitioner asserted that the petition should be
granted because the Commissioner had developed the criminal case
in the guise of a civil investigation even after the civil
investigation had uncovered firm evidence of fraud. Petitioner
asserted that one of the Commissioner’s civil investigators (Cox)
had improperly collaborated with one of the Commissioner’s
criminal investigators (Voorhees) before petitioner’s case was
referred to CID. Petitioner asserted that the Commissioner had
improperly conducted a criminal examination under the guise of a
civil examination. The District Court denied petitioner’s
petition, and that denial was affirmed on appeal. See Hickey v.
United States, 92 Fed. Appx. 317 (6th Cir. 2004).3
OPINION
Petitioners move the Court to exclude from evidence all of
the proffered evidence because, they argue, Cox and Voorhees
disregarded petitioners’ constitutional rights by criminally
investigating petitioner under the guise of a civil examination
3 While the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit generally
disfavors the citation of unpublished decisions, the rules of
that court allow such a citation for the purpose of establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case. See 6th Cir.
R. 28(g).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011