- 17 -
fraud. See Castillo v. Commissioner, 84 T.C. 405, 409-410
(1985). Respondent also established that petitioner failed to
make estimated tax payments in 1996.
In an attempt to establish the remaining badges of fraud,
respondent relies almost entirely on petitioner’s plea agreement,
the plea hearing transcript, and testimony directed towards those
documents. However, at trial, respondent informed the Court that
the documents were under the seal of the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California. Respondent further stated
that the seal could have been removed but was not because
respondent’s counsel failed to realize the seal was in place
until the week before trial. Respondent provided no authority
for our using those documents while they are under seal. The
Court informed respondent that it would respect the seal of a
Federal District Court and would not consider the plea agreement
or the plea hearing transcript. In an attempt to get into
evidence the information contained in those documents, respondent
called Special Agent Bautista as a witness. Specifically,
Special Agent Bautista testified to admissions purportedly made
by petitioner during the plea hearing. However, the testimony
was struck from the record because it was based on Special Agent
Bautista’s reading of the sealed documents. The purported
admissions were not made directly to Special Agent Bautista, and
he had no independent recollection of the admissions.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011