- 4 -
in a “News Release” procedures governing agent conduct in
investigating tax fraud cases. On initial contact the agent was
required to read a Miranda warning but failed to do so. The
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the IRS was
bound by the stated procedures and that statements obtained in
violation thereof were inadmissible in the criminal proceedings.
The estate argues that this case, also involving the violation of
an internal administrative procedure, should follow the line of
reasoning in Heffner. However, as the court noted in Rosenberg
v. Commissioner, supra at 529, the Heffner decision was grounded
in due process. In Rosenberg, the taxpayer argued that the
denial of a hearing before Appeals denied her due process. The
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, affirming the decision of
this Court, held that “Due process does not require a hearing at
the initial stage or at any particular point of an administrative
proceeding.” Id. at 533. Further, the court noted that the case
before it was not a criminal prosecution but rather a deficiency
determination. Here, we are also not concerned with a criminal
proceeding. Because the due process concerns in Heffner are not
present here, we conclude that Heffner does not apply.2
2Respondent further notes that United States v. Heffner, 420
F.2d 809 (4th Cir. 1969), was decided before United States v.
Caceres, 440 U.S. 741 (1979). In Caceres, the Supreme Court
declined to exclude evidence of a conversation between an IRS
special agent and a defendant that was recorded in violation of
the Internal Revenue Manual. This Court has questioned Heffner’s
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011