Legal Opinion

United States v. Stacey

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 1, 2005No. Nos. 03-30002, 03-30019, 03-30020, 03-30058, 03-30111Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

1. The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find that Ronald and Ele*17cia Stacey (together, the “Defendants”) had a tax due and owing. The certificates of assessment were neither challenged nor proved to be invalid. See United States v. Voorhies, 658 F.2d 710, 715 (9th Cir.1981) (recognizing certificates of assessment as adequate evidence of tax liability).

2. Whether or not Mrs. Stacey knew of the tax deficiency at the time of filing, she was on notice that a deficiency existed once the notices of deficiency were sent to her and her husband. See Roszkos v. Commissioner,…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. United States v. Alfred Arnold AmelineCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
  2. Lingle v. Chevron U. S. A. Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2005
  3. Banks v. DretkeSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. United States v. FernandezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  5. United States v. Francisco Javier Alvarez, A.K.A. Frank Javier Alvarez, United States of America v. Richard ValenzuelaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API