03/17/2019
A movie producer’s petition for US Supreme Court review in his criminal tax case raises two critical questions for federal white collar crime matters:
1) Whether a judge must order an acquittal when the evidence for and against guilt is equal, and
2) Whether a statement that is true based on a reasonable reading of an ambiguous regulation can be deemed false in a criminal fraud trial because it conflicts with the government’s interpretation of the regulation.
Fourteen retired Federal judges support the movie producer’s position on the first issue, and numerous law professors and others support the producer’s position on the second issue—that is, that he cannot be convicted of criminal fraud for relying on a reasonable reading of an ambiguous regulation.
Hopefully the Court takes up one or both of these important issues.
White collar crime often turns on intent. A jury concluded Peter Hoffman intended to deceive Louisiana's tax program incentivizing local production. The trial judge was less sure. Now, Hoffman fights for his life, and he's getting support from retired judges and law professors.
