208 F.2d 914 (6th Cir. 1953), 11731, Hanson v. United States

Docket Nº:11731.
Citation:208 F.2d 914
Party Name:HANSON v. UNITED STATES.
Case Date:December 21, 1953
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 914

208 F.2d 914 (6th Cir. 1953)

HANSON

v.

UNITED STATES.

No. 11731.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

December 21, 1953

William A. Belt, and Dan H. McCullough, Toledo, Ohio, for appellant.

Gerald P. Openlander, Asst. U.S. Atty., Toledo, Ohio (John J. Kane, Jr. U.S. Atty., Cleveland, Ohio, on the brief), for appellee.

Before MARTIN, McALLISTER and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of knowingly and willfully attempting to defeat and evade the payment of personal income taxes. On appeal, we are primarily

Page 915

concerned with two claimed errors on the trial- the refusal of the trial court to permit certain evidence to be introduced in defense of the charge against the accused, and refusal to instruct the jury as requested.

Appellant was the owner of 1118 shares of a total of 1247 shares of the common stock of the Hanson Clutch and Machinery Company. His sister and two brothers-in-law owned 125 shares, and the balance of 4 shares was owned by two other men. Appellant was also the owner of all of the preferred stock of the corporation. An agent of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Gregory Susko, in checking the books of the corporation, was informed by appellant that in its sales, the corporation issued three types of invoices: 'E' invoices for excavators; 'C' invoices for clutches; 'R' invoices for repairs; and he was further advised that these were the only designations used for invoices on sales by the company. Thereafter, Agent Susko, with a commendable, and remarkable, awareness of his duties, noticed that a certain contractor, Kranz, was using a new Hanson shovel. He thereupon checked the books of the Hanson Company and found that there was no record of the sale of this shovel to Kranz. He interviewed Mr. Kranz and obtained from him the original invoices of the Hanson Clutch and Machinery Company which covered the sale of the shovel to him. At that time, he noticed that the invoice number on the Kranz transaction was M-93. He then called upon the sales manager and chief bookkeeper of the Hanson Company, as well as Mr. Hanson, and inquired whether there were any invoices of the Hanson Clutch and Machinery Company which bore the designation 'M.' He was told by each of these men that there were no such invoices. Thereafter, the bookkeeper of the company, in response to a subpoena, appeared before the Intelligence Unit of the Treasury Department at Toledo and gave testimony in which he stated that there were numerous sales on which 'M' invoices were issued, and that there were...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP