Unpublished Disposition, 921 F.2d 282 (9th Cir. 1990)

Annotate this Case
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 921 F.2d 282 (9th Cir. 1990)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.Horace Lee NOBLITT, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 89-50244.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 13, 1990.* Decided Dec. 19, 1990.

Before GOODWIN, Chief Judge, and WALLACE and NELSON, Circuit Judges.


MEMORANDUM** 

During the tax years 1977 through 1980, Defendant Horace Lee Noblitt failed to report to the IRS the gross income he received from his employment at Universal City Studios, Inc., even though the specific respective amounts were sufficient to require him to do so.1  Consequently, a jury convicted him on four counts of failing to file income tax returns, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7203. Noblitt challenges his conviction on three grounds: as a resident of California, he is not subject to federal income tax liabilities; the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this action; and he does not qualify as an "individual" or "person" within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code. The law with respect to each of these claims is so well settled that repeating it here would serve no purpose. We affirm.

Further, we sanction Noblitt, pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 38, for filing a frivolous appeal. It is within our discretion to impose double or single costs and reasonable attorney fees for such appeals. Olson v. United States, 760 F.2d 1003, 1005 (9th Cir. 1985); Gattuso v. Pecorella, 733 F.2d 709, 710 (9th Cir. 1984). We therefore impose double costs on Noblitt and attorney fees fixed at $500.00.

AFFIRMED.

 *

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for submission on the record and briefs and without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); Ninth Circuit Rule 34-4

 **

This disposition is not 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

 1

Those amounts were $25,789, $28,198, $46,764, and $39,649

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.