J. A. Herzog v. United States

Good Law
226 F.2d 561·48 A.F.T.R. (P-H) 279·1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5017
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 11, 195514611_1California4,339 words

Opinion

Opinion

Byrne, J.

Appellant J. A. Herzog operated a Pontiac agency dealing in both new and used cars. His principal business appears to have been the wholesaling of used cars to other used car dealers. Most of Herzog’s car sales were handled through two employees, Douglass and Cline, who received the money from the sales and purportedly turned it over to Herzog or his office manager.

In March of 1954 Herzog was indicted on three counts charging wilful attempted income tax evasion. He was found not guilty on counts one and two relating to 1947 taxes, and guilty on count three relating to 1948 taxes. On this appeal, appellant does not contend that the evidence in the record is insufficient to support the guilty verdict. What he does contend is that his rights were substantially prejudiced by (a) rulings excluding certain evidence offered by him, (b) failure to give certain requested instructions, and (c) denial of his- request for examination of the grand jury testimony of certain witnesses.

One of the issues of fact in the case was whether side payments in excess of invoice prices were made to Herzog by the persons who purchased used cars from him. Appellant offered in evidence bi-monthly issues…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.