Smith v. Richert

35 F.3d 300 (7th Cir. 1994)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The Indiana Department of Revenue (D) believed that Smith (P) had not filed Indiana income tax returns for some years though required by law to do so. A subpoena duces tecum commanded to produce financial records, for the years 1984 through 1988. P was required by statute to keep such records. P refused on Fifth Amendment and other grounds to comply with the subpoena and was prosecuted for and convicted of failing to permit the examination. The court ruled that the records sought by the subpoena were required records and so could lawfully be compelled to be produced. P then applied for federal habeas corpus. The district court dismissed the claim. This appeal resulted.