No. 18-7133
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-procedure criminal-law criminal-procedure criminal-tax due-process elements federal-courts federal-prosecution indictment indictment-elements pretrial-motion statutory-interpretation substantive-law tax-law uncertainty
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the substantial existence of uncertainty in the governing substantive tax law is irrelevant to the determination of a pretrial motion to dismiss in a federal criminal tax proceeding so long as the indictment alleges the elements of the charged offense
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW I. Contrary to the rule in James v. United States, 366 U.S. 213 (1961), is the substantial existence of uncertainty in the governing substantive tax law irrelevant to the determination of a pretrial motion to dismiss in a federal criminal tax proceeding so long as the indictment alleges the elements of the charged offense? i
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-22
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-12-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 22, 2019)
Attorneys
Paul Burks
Noell Peter Tin — Tin Fulton Walker & Owen, PLLC, Petitioner
Noell Peter Tin — Tin Fulton Walker & Owen, PLLC, Petitioner
Noell Peter Tin — Tin Fulton Walker & Owen, PLLC, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent