09-4077 U.S. v. Kruse

Listen to this article

Tax Fraud
Sufficiency of the evidence

Where a defendant could not locate receipts to support his deductions, and took personal draws from the business far exceeding his reported income, the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction for filing false tax returns.

"The evidence at trial was sufficient to justify Mr. Kruse's conviction. Indeed, it was substantial. Government witnesses testified about conflicting explanations of the tax returns given by Mr. Kruse. According to these witnesses, Mr. Kruse told Agent Ulrich that Mr. Kruse had totaled the invoices at the end of the year and those invoices would have supported the tax return, but that he could not find the receipts. Later, he told Special Agent Luepke that he had no idea where the figures on the tax return had originated. The contradictions in this testimony allowed the district court, as fact-finder, to infer that Mr. Kruse was altering his story because he knew the returns were false."

"Mr. Kruse also told Special Agent Luepke that he was making $300,000 to $400,000 per year from the business- figures that greatly exceeded those on his tax returns. The district court therefore could infer that Mr. Kruse knew he should have reported additional income. Finally, Mr. Kruse took personal draws from the business, during each of the years in question, that greatly exceeded his reported income. This conduct allowed the trier to infer that Mr. Kruse knew that the business was taking in at least as much money as he took out. In addition to the foregoing evidence, which bears directly on the 2002, 2003 and 2004 falsifications, Mr. Kruse's unreported gambling winnings allowed the fact-finder, in the context of this case, to infer lack of respect for the tax laws."

Affirmed.

09-4077 U.S. v. Kruse

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Griesbach, J., Ripple, J.

Full Text