33:T511,{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"Legislation","name":"Joe Palermo v. United States, 254 F.2d 130","datePublished":"1958-04-14","legislationDate":"1958-04-14","citation":"Joe Palermo v. United States, 254 F.2d 130 (9th Cir. 1958)","countryOfOrigin":"USA","jurisdiction":"Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit","description":"Read the full text of Joe Palermo v. United States (Joe Palermo v. United States, 254 F.2d 130 (9th Cir. 1958)). This legal opinion, filed in 1958-04-14, from the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit discusses important legal matters. Access this case and related legal documents on Midpage, an AI-powered legal research platform.","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/joe-palermo-v-united-states-244760"},"author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Midpage"},"url":"https://app.midpage.ai/document/joe-palermo-v-united-states-244760","isPartOf":{"@type":"WebSite","name":"Midpage","url":"https://app.midpage.ai"},"inLanguage":"en","keywords":"legal, opinion, document, research, midpage, Joe Palermo v. United States, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Joe Palermo v. United States, 254 F.2d 130 (9th Cir. 1958)","isAccessibleForFree":true,"isFamilyFriendly":true}35:T440, PER CURIAM.

Palermo appeals from a judgment of the District Court of the Eastern District of Washington on a jury-verdict holding him guilty of willfully attempting to evade a large portion of the income taxes of himself and his wife for the calendar years 1950 to 1953 inclusive, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 145(b) (1939 code).

We find no merit in appellant’s contentions (a) that the obvious and manifold omissions of income in his written statements to the maker of his returns and thereafter the filing of the returns by him did not constitute sufficient evidence to show his criminal intent; (b) that certain refused requested instructions were not sufficiently covered by the instructions given; or (c) that the evidence of similar conduct leading to understatements of income in other tax years was improperly admitted.

The judgment is affirmed.