Unpublished Disposition, 927 F.2d 611 (9th Cir. 1991)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 927 F.2d 611 (9th Cir. 1991)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Keith T. ENGSTROM and Sheryl L. Engstrom, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 90-30097.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 16, 1990.* Decided Feb. 28, 1991.

On Appeal From the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, No. CR-89-117-Z; Thomas S. Zilly, District Judge, Presiding.

W.D. Wash.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

Before JAMES R. BROWNING, BEEZER and RYMER, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

A jury found Keith Engstrom guilty of four counts of willful failure to file income tax returns in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203, two counts of submitting false W-4 forms in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7205, and two counts of knowingly submitting a false claim for a refund in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287. The same jury found Sheryl Engstrom guilty of two counts of willful failure to file income tax returns and one count of submitting a false W-4 form. The court sentenced Keith Engstrom to three years and seven months in prison, five years probation and a $2500 fine. The court sentenced Sheryl Engstrom to two years probation, 250 hours of community service and a $2000 fine. The Engstroms appeal.

The Engstroms moved for a continuance before trial in order to allow the government to comply fully with 26 U.S.C. § 6103(h) (5). Section 6103(h) (5) provides defendants in tax cases with an unqualified right to information regarding the audit history of prospective jurors. United States v. Hashimoto, 878 F.2d 1126, 1133 (9th Cir. 1989). The Engstroms argue that it was error for the district court to deny the motion, because the government provided only a partial response to their request.

The Engstroms' claim is controlled by our recent decision in United States v. Sinigaglio, No. 90-30109, slip op. (9th Cir.Feb. 5, 1991). We therefore reverse the Engstroms' convictions and remand for a new trial. Because this claim is dispositive, we find it unnecessary to address the other claims raised on appeal.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

 **

This disposition isnot appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.