Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Pflum

United States District Court, D. Kansas

July 10, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
DAVID G. PFLUM (01), Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          DANIEL D. CRABTREE UNITES STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This matter comes before the court on defendant David G. Pflum's Motion for Order (Doc. 229) filed June 2018. Mr. Pflum submitted a pro se letter seeking relief from the court, and thus, the Clerk docketed his letter as a motion. The government filed a Response in Opposition (Doc. 231). For reasons explained below, the court denies Mr. Pflum's motion.

         I. Background

         In June 2014, a grand jury Indictment charged Mr. Pflum with (1) Attempting to Evade and Defeat the Payment of Tax; and (2) Corruptly Endeavoring to Obstruct or Impede the Due Administration of the Internal Revenue Laws. Doc. 1. A grand jury returned a First Superseding Indictment in May 2016 against Mr. Pflum for the same offenses during additional tax years. Doc. 100. In January 2017, the case went to trial, and a jury returned guilty verdicts against Mr. Pflum on both counts charged. Doc. 179. The court sentenced Mr. Pflum to 5 years' imprisonment and ordered him to pay more than $8 million in restitution. Doc. 217. The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment on appeal and denied all pending motions as moot. Doc. 228. In June 2018, the court received a letter from Mr. Pflum requesting contact information-including mailing address, e-mail address, and phone number-for all jury members from Mr. Pflum's trial. Doc. 229. The letter asked the Clerk of the Court to mail this information to Mr. Pflum's home address in St. Marys, Kansas.

         II. Legal Standard

         D. Kan. Rule 47.1 governs communications with jurors after trial. The local rule provides:

(a) Court Order Required. No. one-including the parties, their attorneys, or the agents or employees of either-is permitted to examine or interview any juror, either orally or in writing, except:
(1) by order of the court in its discretion; and
(2) under such terms and conditions as the court establishes.
(b) Restrictions on Interviews. If the court permits examination or interviews of jurors, the following restrictions apply, in addition to any other restrictions the court imposes:
. . .
(3) If a juror agrees to an interview, he or she must not disclose any information with respect to:
(A) the specific vote of any juror other than the juror being ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.