WILEY

v.

CARPENTER

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Nigel Winfield, 960 F.2d 970 (11th Cir. 1992)
  …presented in the instant case and has determined that the statute of limitations begins to run on the date of the last overt act, not the date the return was due to be filed. United States v. Ferris, 807 F. 2d 269, 271 (1st Cir.1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 950,107 S.Ct. 1613, 94 L.Ed.2d 798 (1987). The Ferris court cited Beacon Brass irj announcing its rule, reasoning that the statute cannot sensibly be deemed to run until the acts upon which the crime is based — including false statements — are completed…
• United States v. Williams, 928 F.2d 145 (5th Cir. 1991)
  …States v. Ferris, 807 F. 2d 269, 271 (1st Cir.1986) (“If all that defendant had done was to fail to file his 1977 income tax return, then the last act of evasion would have been April 15, 1978, the date the return and tax were due.”), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 950, 107 S.Ct. 1613, 94 L.Ed.2d 798 (1987); United States v. Crocker, 753 F.Supp. 1209 (D.Del.1991); United States v. Sloan, 704 F.Supp. 880 (N.D.Ind.1989); United States v. Sherman, 426 F.Supp. 85 (S.D.N.Y.1976); 15 Mertens Law of Federal Income Taxati…
• United States v. Dandy, 998 F.2d 1344 (6th Cir. 1993)
  …is the date of the latest affirmative act of evasion that triggers the statute of limitations. See United States v. Winfield, 960 F. 2d 970, 973 (11th Cir.1992) (per curiam); United States v. Ferris, 807 F. 2d 269, 271 (1st Cir.1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 950, 107 S.Ct. 1613, 94 L.Ed.2d 798 (1987). We adopt the First and Eleventh Circuits’ approach to this issue because to hold, otherwise would only reward a defendant for successfully evading discovery of his tax fraud for a period of six years subsequen…