Arthur King Wilson v. United States

250 F.2d 312 57-2 USTC P 10,040 Arthur King WILSON, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee. No. 15301. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Nov. 14, 1957, As Modified on Denial of Rehearing Feb. 27, 1958. Spurgeon Avakian, J. Richard Johnston, H. Helmut Loring, Oakland, Cal., Koerner, Young, McColloch & Dezendorf, Portland, Or., for appellant. Lloyd H. Burke, U.S. Atty., John Lockley, Asst. U.S. Atty., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee. Before DENMAN, Senior Circuit Judge and POPE and BARNES, Circuit judges. BARNES, Circuit Judge. 1 After waiving a jury trial, appellant Arthur King Wilson was tried and convicted by the District Court of six counts of willfully attempting to defeat and evade the payment of federal income taxes and Federal Insurance Contribution Act (commonly known as 'Social Security') taxes withheld from the wages of employees of Coast Redwood Company, Inc., a family corporation of which appellant was President, in violation of Section 2707(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, 1 as made applicable by Sections 1430 and 1627 of said Code, 26 U.S.C.A. 1430, 1627. The periods involved in the six counts were the second, third, and fourth…

After waiving a jury trial, appellant Arthur King Wilson was tried and convicted by the District Court of six counts of willfully attempting to defeat and evade the payment of federal income taxes and Federal Insurance Contribution Act (commonly known as “Social Security”) taxes withheld from the wages of employees of Coast Redwood Company, Inc., a family corporation of which appellant was President, in violation of Section 2707(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1939, 1 as made applicable by Sections 1430 and 1627 of said *314 Code, 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 1430 , 1627. The periods involved in the six counts.were the second, third, and fourth quarters of 1952, which encompassed the period from April 1,1952 to December 31, 1952, inclusive. Counts One, Two, and Three related to income taxes allegedly withheld and not paid over in the respective amounts of $49,913.33, $15,605.48, 2 and $41,149.38. Counts Four, Five, and Six dealt with F.I.C.A. taxes allegedly withheld and not paid over in the respective sums of $5,559.95, $3,807.79, and $2,-043.69.

The indictment charged in each and every count that appellant had committed the felonious offense

Appellant raises two questions on this appeal.…

Order Modifying Opinion and Denying Petition for Rehearing.

We consider “Appellee’s Petition for Rehearing en banc” as a petition for rehearing and a suggestion (in accordance with our Rule 23, 28 U.S.C.A.) that the case be reheard en banc. With the modification of the opinion as set forth here-inabove, the petition for a rehearing before the Court as constituted for the hearing of the appeal is denied. The suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.