United States v. Sullivan

[1] The case also served as the legal test for prosecution of Al Capone for tax evasion by Assistant Attorney General Mabel Walker Willebrandt.[2] In the 1920s, during the Prohibition Era, the successful prosecution of prominent organized crime bosses was nearly impossible because of witness intimidation and the lack of written records.Mabel Walker Willebrandt, then an Assistant Attorney General in charge of enforcing the Volstead Act, recognized that the figures publicly led lavish lifestyles but never filed tax returns and so might be prosecuted for that failure without testimony being required about the specific crimes that enriched them.Sullivan's lawyers argued that filing a tax return on illegal income would amount to self-incrimination and so he was therefore protected by the Fifth Amendment.Holmes dispatched another objection: It is urged that, if a return were made, the defendant would be entitled to deduct illegal expenses, such as bribery.
Supreme Court of the United StatesL. Ed.U.S. LEXIS4th Cir.Fifth AmendmentWilliam H. TaftOliver W. Holmes Jr.Willis Van DevanterJames C. McReynoldsLouis BrandeisGeorge SutherlandPierce ButlerEdward T. SanfordHarlan F. StoneU.S. Const. amend. VRevenue Act of 1921United States Supreme Courtincome taxAl Caponetax evasionAssistant Attorney GeneralMabel Walker WillebrandtProhibition Erawitness intimidationVolstead Actbootleggerself-incriminationFourth Circuit Court of AppealsOliver Wendell Holmes Jr.Internal Revenue ServicebribesTaxation of illegal income in the United StatesCNNMoneyUnited States Fifth Amendmentcriminal procedureGrand JuryHurtado v. CaliforniaEx parte BainWong Wing v. United StatesMaxwell v. DowUnited States v. MorelandBeck v. WashingtonUnited States v. CottonDouble Jeopardy ClauseBlockburger v. United StatesGrady v. CorbinUnited States v. FelixUnited States v. DixonUnited States v. RandenbushBurton v. United StatesFong Foo v. United StatesAshe v. SwensonBurks v. United StatesEvans v. MichiganBravo-Fernandez v. United StatesMcElrath v. GeorgiaUnited States v. WilsonLudwig v. MassachusettsSmith v. United StatesUnited States v. PerezUnited States v. JornUnited States v. DinitzOregon v. KennedyBlueford v. ArkansasBartkus v. IllinoisWaller v. FloridaUnited States v. WheelerHeath v. AlabamaUnited States v. LaraPuerto Rico v. Sanchez ValleGamble v. United StatesDenezpi v. United StatesEx parte BigelowPalko v. ConnecticutLouisiana ex rel. Francis v. ResweberBaxstrom v. HeroldNorth Carolina v. PearceBenton v. MarylandSelf-Incrimination ClauseGriffin v. CaliforniaMiranda v. ArizonaWilliams v. FloridaEdwards v. ArizonaOregon v. ElstadIllinois v. PerkinsMcNeil v. WisconsinMitchell v. United StatesUnited States v. HubbellDickerson v. United StatesChavez v. MartinezYarborough v. AlvaradoMissouri v. SeibertUnited States v. PataneFlorida v. PowellMaryland v. ShatzerBerghuis v. ThompkinsJ. D. B. v. North CarolinaBobby v. DixonHowes v. FieldsSalinas v. TexasVega v. TekohUnited States Sixteenth AmendmentBrushaber v. Union Pacific RailroadStanton v. Baltic Mining CompanyStratton's Independence, Ltd. v. HowbertTowne v. EisnerEisner v. MacomberBowers v. Kerbaugh-Empire Co.Moore v. United StatesUnited States v. PhellisCommissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co.Taft v. BowersHelvering v. BruunHelvering v. HorstCrane v. CommissionerUnited States v. DavisCommissioner v. TuftsJames v. United StatesBurnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co.Cammarano v. United StatesUnited States v. General Dynamics Corp.