United States v. Alan Rodrigues
696 F. App'x 785
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Alan Rodrigues was convicted of conspiracy to defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371), mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341), and aiding in the preparation of materially false tax returns (26 U.S.C. § 7206(2)) related to NADN’s sale of a tax product called "Tax Break 2000."
- Prosecution evidence showed Tax Break was marketed to improperly exploit the disability access tax credit and lacked economic substance.
- Witnesses (Porter, Stovall, Tigani) testified Rodrigues knew Tax Break was sham and approved sales materials; purchasers (e.g., Gannon) testified Rodrigues made assurances indicating the promissory notes were sham.
- Documentary evidence included a technical memorandum warning Rodrigues Tax Break would not survive IRS challenge and could expose NADN employees to criminal penalties, and evidence Rodrigues was resident agent for a shell company used to generate false Forms 1099.
- Rodrigues moved for judgment of acquittal under Rule 29 and for a new trial under Rule 33; the district court denied both. The Ninth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that Rodrigues acted willfully/specific intent to defraud for aiding false returns and mail fraud | Gov: circumstantial and direct evidence (witness testimony, doc memo, purchaser statements) show willfulness and intent | Rodrigues: had good-faith belief that Tax Break sales were lawful | Affirmed — evidence sufficient for a rational jury to find willfulness and specific intent beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Whether Rodrigues joined the conspiracy to defraud the U.S. | Gov: Rodrigues supervised sales, approved scripts, helped issue false 1099s, acted via shell company — showing membership | Rodrigues: challenges connection to conspiracy membership | Affirmed — connection to conspiracy shown; even slight connection sufficient |
| Whether district court abused discretion in denying new trial as verdict against weight of evidence | Gov: primary witness credible; other evidence corroborates | Rodrigues: alleged weight of evidence and witness issues justify new trial | Affirmed — district court permissibly weighed credibility and denied new trial |
| Standard of review for sufficiency and new trial motions | Gov: applies Jackson standard and abuse-of-discretion for new trial | Rodrigues: insists on higher scrutiny of intent proof | Court: de novo review for sufficiency; abuse of discretion for new trial; standards applied and met |
Key Cases Cited
- Pearson v. United States, 391 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir.) (standard for sufficiency challenge review)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (Sup. Ct.) (sufficiency of the evidence standard)
- Tomsha-Miguel v. United States, 766 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir.) (application of Jackson standard)
- King v. United States, 660 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir.) (abuse-of-discretion standard for new trial)
- Salerno v. United States, 902 F.2d 1429 (9th Cir.) (willfulness and specific intent in tax false-statement prosecutions)
- French v. United States, 748 F.3d 922 (9th Cir.) (specific intent requirement for mail fraud)
- Rogers v. United States, 321 F.3d 1226 (9th Cir.) (intent to defraud may be inferred circumstantially)
- Crooks v. United States, 804 F.2d 1441 (9th Cir.) (knowledge of sham transactions supports intent to defraud)
- Schulman v. United States, 817 F.2d 1355 (9th Cir.) (sham transactions are illegal)
- Clardy v. United States, 612 F.2d 1139 (9th Cir.) (affirming conviction for sham tax deductions)
- Lane v. United States, 765 F.2d 1376 (9th Cir.) (slight connection to conspiracy sufficient for conviction)
- Alston v. United States, 974 F.2d 1206 (9th Cir.) (district court may weigh witness credibility when considering new trial)
- Rush v. United States, 749 F.2d 1369 (9th Cir.) (new trial warranted only in exceptional cases where evidence preponderates heavily against verdict)