Filed: Jun. 21, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 21, 2013
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS CLINTON E. AVERITTE, Magistrate Judge. Came for consideration the motion to suppress filed May 17, 2013, by defendant EDGAR A. LOCKETT, JR. On June 20, 2013, the undersigned conducted a pre-trial hearing on defendant's motion. At the hearing, counsel for defendant clarified that by his motion, he is seeking to prevent the Government from introducing evidence that defendant did not file a Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Retu
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS CLINTON E. AVERITTE, Magistrate Judge. Came for consideration the motion to suppress filed May 17, 2013, by defendant EDGAR A. LOCKETT, JR. On June 20, 2013, the undersigned conducted a pre-trial hearing on defendant's motion. At the hearing, counsel for defendant clarified that by his motion, he is seeking to prevent the Government from introducing evidence that defendant did not file a Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Retur..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO DENY DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS
CLINTON E. AVERITTE, Magistrate Judge.
Came for consideration the motion to suppress filed May 17, 2013, by defendant EDGAR A. LOCKETT, JR. On June 20, 2013, the undersigned conducted a pre-trial hearing on defendant's motion. At the hearing, counsel for defendant clarified that by his motion, he is seeking to prevent the Government from introducing evidence that defendant did not file a Form 1040 U.S. Individual Income Tax Return with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for each of the years the Indictment alleges he committed the offense of Income Tax Evasion. Defendant's argument appears to be not only that any Form 1040 is not admissible because it does not reflect a valid control number assigned by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, but also that the absence of such a number prevents the Government from presenting evidence that any Form 1040 income tax return was not filed or should have been filed.
As noted by the Court at the hearing, defendant's pleading does not appear to be a motion to suppress but, rather, an objection to evidence the defense anticipates the Government will offer in its case in chief and, as such, is an evidentiary matter for the trial judge. Consequently, to the extent the motion is, in fact, an objection to be urged at trial, the undersigned enters no ruling and defendant may present his challenge to the evidence at trial.
To the extent defendant's pleading is, in fact, a motion to suppress, the undersigned finds that the motion should be denied based upon the case law cited by the Government holding that the failure of the IRS to place a valid control number on Form 1040 is not a defense to prosecution for income tax evasion, a violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the RECOMMENDATION of the United States Magistrate Judge to the United States District Judge that the motion to suppress filed by defendant EDGAR A. LOCKETT, JR. be DENIED.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE
The United States District Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Report and Recommendation to each party by the most efficient means available.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.
