United States v. Harold E. Nichols

10 F.3d 808 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Harold E. NICHOLS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 90-50636. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 2, 1993. Submission Vacated March 31, 1993. Resubmitted Nov. 9, 1993. Decided Nov. 23, 1993. 1 Before: BROWNING, HUG, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges 2 MEMORANDUM * I. 3 Sufficiency of the evidence. A. Conspiracy 4 Nichols contends the government failed to prove he and Fulton agreed to defraud the United States because it did not offer evidence they "ever discussed or in any way agreed to any conspiracy." However, a conspiratorial agreement need not be proven by direct evidence and may be "inferred from the acts of the parties." United States v. Ayers, 924 F.2d 1468, 1482 (9th Cir.1991) (citation and internal quotations omitted). The jurors could reasonably conclude Nichols and Fulton agreed to evade the payment of taxes from their joint…