Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

409 F.2d 228

Docket No. 22809.

Eustis v. United States

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided March 21, 1969.

Rehearing Denied May 29, 1969.

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1969-03-21

Cited by 11 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1974

8 federal appellate · 1 district ·

2 counsel of record

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 7203

Relies on Edwards v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1969-03-21

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Lin B. Densmore, San Francisco, Cal. (argued), Dennis L. Woodman, Redwood City, Cal., for appellant.

¶2F. Steele Langford (argued), Asst. U. S. Atty., Cecil F. Poole, U. S. Atty., Jerrold M. Ladar, Asst. U. S. Atty., Crim. Div., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

¶3Before MADDEN, Judge of the United States Court of Claims, and MERRILL and HUFSTEDLER, Circuit Judges.

¶4PER CURIAM:

¶5Following a nonjury trial appellant was convicted of a misdemeanor violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203 for wilful failure to file tax returns for the years 1962, 1963 and 1964.

¶6Appellant is an experienced tax accountant. His excuse for failure to file was the pressure of business in taking care of his clients’ tax problems. He asserts that his failure to file was not wilful within the meaning of § 7203 and on this appeal contends that the record does not establish the requisite wilfulness.

¶7The same contention, under facts very similar to those presented here, was made and was rejected by this court in Edwards v. United States, 375 F.2d 862 (9th Cir. 1967). We reach the same result.

¶8Affirmed.

/409/f2d/228 · .json · Public domain