United States v. Gordon Hall
681 F. App'x 621
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Gordon Hall was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 514 for making/passing purported “money orders” that directed payment from the U.S. Treasury.
- Hall mailed the instruments after asking an IRS agent the specific amounts owed and included 1040-V payment vouchers identifying taxpayer and tax periods.
- An expert testified the instruments incorporated high-quality security features resembling genuine money orders.
- At trial Hall advanced sovereign-citizen–style beliefs in court and in filings; the district court did not order a competency hearing.
- At sentencing the court imposed several supervised-release conditions, including Standard Condition 11 (no association with felons without permission) and a Special Condition restricting major purchases/financial obligations.
- On appeal the Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction, rejected the competency challenge, but vacated two supervised-release conditions and remanded for clarification or resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence under § 514 | Government: instruments were false/fictitious, purported U.S. Treasury drawee, and Hall intended to defraud | Hall: instruments were not false/fictitious, did not purport U.S. authority, and lacked intent to defraud | Affirmed: instruments were bogus money orders, listed Treasury as drawee, and facts support intent to defraud |
| Competency hearing | Government: Hall’s statements reflected beliefs, not incompetence; no mental illness shown | Hall: inconsistent in-court statements warranted a competency hearing | Affirmed: beliefs were sovereign-citizen views, not evidence of incompetence; no hearing required |
| Standard Condition 11 (no association with felons) | Government: condition valid to supervise/reduce risk | Hall: condition unconstitutionally burdens familial association because his children are felons | Vacated/remanded: court failed to make required on-record findings about necessity and liberty deprivation; must reenter without condition or resentence with findings |
| Special Condition restricting financial transactions | Government: condition needed to supervise financial conduct | Hall: condition is unconstitutionally vague as to covered transactions | Vacated/remanded: condition impermissibly vague; court must clarify or reimpose with specificity |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Howick, 263 F.3d 1056 (9th Cir. 2001) (definition of “fictitious” financial instrument)
- United States v. Murphy, 824 F.3d 1197 (9th Cir. 2016) (inference instrument purported U.S. authority when listing Treasury as drawee)
- United States v. Neal, 776 F.3d 645 (9th Cir. 2015) (holding that unorthodox beliefs do not alone show incompetence)
- United States v. Johnson, 610 F.3d 1138 (9th Cir. 2010) (defendant may present unorthodox defenses absent mental illness)
- United States v. Stoterau, 524 F.3d 988 (9th Cir. 2008) (standard of review for supervised-release conditions)
- United States v. Tapia, 665 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2011) (plain-error review when no timely objection at sentencing)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009) (plain-error test requirements)
- United States v. Wolf Child, 699 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2012) (family-association liberty interest requires enhanced findings for broad associational bans)
- United States v. Guagliardo, 278 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 2002) (supervised-release condition void for vagueness)