United States v. Larry Richard Duck

82 F.3d 423 77 A.F.T.R.2d 96 -1792 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Larry Richard DUCK, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50557. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted April 11, 1996. * Decided April 15, 1996. 1 Before: SCHROEDER and LEAVY, Circuit Judges, and TRIMBLE, ** District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Larry Richard Duck appeals from his conviction on two counts of willfully subscribing to false income tax returns in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206 (1). Duck argues that the district court erred by rejecting his explanations of a hidden "cash hoard" and cash reimbursements for credit card usage, and by finding the evidence sufficient when the government failed to prove a "likely source" of the additional unreported taxable income attributed to him for tax years 1987 and 1988. We reject Duck's arguments and affirm. 4 It has long been the rule that the government need not prove a "likely source"…