United States v. Donald Wanland, Jr.

Good Law
830 F.3d 947·2016 WL 4011175·118 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5299·2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13661
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 27, 201614-10170California4,715 words

Opinion

Opinion

Owens, J.

Defendant Donald Wanland, Jr. appeals from his jury convictions and sentence for tax related charges, including tax evasion. Although Wanland raises many arguments challenging his convictions and sentence, none has merit, so we affirm the district court in all respects.

I. Factual Background

Wanland was a successful civil attorney in Sacramento, California, and his law practice generated considerable income. In the 1990s, he entered into two partnership agreements with Richard Bernstein — the Law Offices of Wanland and Bernstein (from which Wanland drew his income) and 705 University Partners (which held the real estate at 705 University Avenue, the partnership’s law office). Wanland received 75% of the profits, while Bernstein received 25% of the profits, in scheduled monthly draws. More specifically, partners were entitled to “withdraw from the partnership funds in equal monthly installments an amount equal to four-fifths of his distributive share of partnership net profits for the preceding year.” 705 University Partners had its own bank account (“705 Account”), which Wanland used as both his business and personal account.

Wanland’s disputes with the Internal…

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.