Jerry and Patricia A. Dixon, et al. - Page 95

                                       - 58 -                                         

          (an employee will not intentionally make false or misleading                
          verbal or written statements in matters of official interest).              
          The notices proposed to suspend both Sims and McWade for 14                 
          calendar days without pay.                                                  
               McWade retired from the IRS effective October 2, 1993.  On             
          November 2, 1993, Acting Chief Counsel Jordan approved Sanchez’s            
          proposed disciplinary action.  Sims was suspended from duty                 
          without pay for 14 days and was transferred to the San Francisco            
          Regional Counsel’s Office, where he was assigned nonsupervisory             
          duties as a Special Litigation Assistant in the General                     
          Litigation area.                                                            
          IV. Ninth Circuit Remand and Subsequent Proceedings                         
          A.        Ninth Circuit Orders in the DuFresne Case                         
               On June 14, 1994, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit           
          filed a per curiam opinion, vacating and remanding this Court’s             
          decisions in the remaining test cases, on the ground that the               
          misconduct of Sims and McWade required further inquiry.  DuFresne           
          v. Commissioner, 26 F.3d at 107.  Citing Arizona v. Fulminante,             
          499 U.S. 279, 309 (1991), the Court of Appeals observed:                    
                    We cannot determine from this record whether the                  
               extent of misconduct rises to the level of a structural                
               defect voiding the judgment as fundamentally unfair, or                
               whether, despite the government’s misconduct, the                      
               judgment can be upheld as harmless error. * * *                        
          Accordingly, the Court of Appeals remanded the remaining test               
          cases to this Court with directions “to conduct an evidentiary              





Page:  Previous  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011