Opinion in United States v. Morrison

We posted about the lower court decision here.

Of the many arguments that the parties have raised, only two warrant extended 11 discussion. The first is the government’s contention that the district court erred in vacating Morrison’s conspiracy conviction on the ground of vagueness. The second is Morrison’s claim that the CCTA was inapplicable to him given New York’s “forbearance policy,” under which the State refrained from collecting taxes on cigarette sales transacted on Native American reservations. According to Morrison, this forbearance policy barred his conviction under the CCTA because that statute provides that, in order for a federal prosecution to lie, the state in which the allegedly contraband cigarettes are found must “require” tax stamps to be placed on  cigarettes. We reverse the district court’s order vacating Morrison’s RICO conspiracy conviction and reject all of Morrison’s challenges to his convictions.

Opinion

Appellant/Government’s Brief
Defendant/Appellee Brief
Government’s Response & Reply Brief
Appellee Reply Brief

This entry was posted in Author: Kate E. Fort, Criminal, Research, taxation and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s