United States v. Williamson
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4934
| 10th Cir. | 2014Background
- John S. Williamson, a long-time tax protester, returned IRS levy notices and filed an affidavit asserting he need not pay income taxes after the IRS levied his wife’s wages in 2008.
- Williamson sent an invoice for $909,067,650 to two IRS agents and later recorded a county claim of lien against those agents’ property alleging unlawful actions by them.
- A federal grand jury indicted Williamson and his wife on (1) corruptly endeavoring to impede administration of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. § 7212(a)) and (2) filing a false lien against federal employees (18 U.S.C. § 1521); Mrs. Williamson pleaded guilty to count two.
- At trial Williamson defended on the basis that he genuinely believed his lien was proper; a forensic psychologist testified he suffered from a delusional disorder.
- The district court refused defense requests for additional jury instructions (including a good-faith/willfulness-type instruction); the jury convicted Williamson on both counts; he was sentenced to four months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release.
- On appeal the Tenth Circuit affirmed, addressing whether the district court erred in declining defense-requested instructions for § 7212(a) and § 1521.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court should have defined "unlawful" / required a Cheek-style willfulness mens rea for § 7212(a) | N/A (government urged correctness of instructions) | Williamson: conviction requires intentional violation of a known legal duty (willfulness); court should define "unlawful" or require knowledge that advantage was unlawful | Rejected: no authority requires Cheek standard for § 7212(a); existing "corruptly" instruction is standard; issue was not preserved so plain-error review fails |
| Whether a good-faith instruction was required for § 1521 (false lien statute) | N/A | Williamson: jury should be allowed to acquit if he honestly believed lien was proper (delusional belief) | Rejected: statute penalizes filing a false lien "knowing or having reason to know" false; objective "reason to know" component allows conviction despite unreasonable subjective belief; good-faith instruction would conflict with statutory standard |
| Whether the trial court erred by not defining commonly used terms (e.g., "unlawful") | N/A | Williamson: court should define familiar terms to impose correct mens rea | Rejected: "unlawful" is common usage and need not be defined; defense did not preserve a clear mens rea objection |
| Whether rule of lenity or lien-law complexity required broader instructions | N/A | Williamson: ambiguity should trigger lenity or require jury protection | Rejected: lenity cannot overcome plain-error preservation requirement; statutory language on § 1521 is clear regarding "reason to know" |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Villegas, 554 F.3d 894 (10th Cir.) (standard for reviewing jury instructions)
- United States v. Bowling, 619 F.3d 1175 (10th Cir.) (additional instruction not required if it only clarifies)
- United States v. Pinson, 542 F.3d 822 (10th Cir.) (court may reject instruction that misstates law)
- United States v. Winchell, 129 F.3d 1093 (10th Cir.) (discussion of mens rea language used in instruction)
- Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991) (willfulness in tax statutes defined as voluntary, intentional violation of known legal duty)
- United States v. Floyd, 740 F.3d 22 (1st Cir.) (definition of "corruptly")
- United States v. Crim, [citation="451 F. App'x 196"] (3d Cir.) (definition of "corruptly")
- United States v. Saffo, 227 F.3d 1260 (10th Cir.) (objective component for "reason to know" standard)
- United States v. Munguia, 704 F.3d 596 (9th Cir.) (following Saffo on "reason to know")
- United States v. Truong, 425 F.3d 1282 (10th Cir.) (evidentiary application of "reason to know" standard)
- United States v. Fishman, 645 F.3d 1175 (10th Cir.) (requiring Supreme Court or Tenth Circuit authority for plain-error to be "plain")
- United States v. Kelly, 147 F.3d 172 (2d Cir.) (noting corruptly instruction approximates willfulness language)