For instance, in Form 1040s prepared by The Kohn Partnership for clients, Kohn stated he followed the form’s instructions to calculate total income as defined by the IRS.
Kohn also argued that the alleged criminal activities occurred in the Eastern District of Missouri, not North Carolina, challenging the venue’s appropriateness. Additionally, he contended that mentioning his 20-year-old prior tax fraud conviction was prejudicial and unconstitutional.
“Because the jury heard about Kohn’s prior conviction, an unacceptable risk was created that the jury convicted him in this case not based on the evidence, but due to his past conviction,” he argued.
Simmons argued that prosecutors provided no evidence of his involvement in filing the false tax returns and criticized the court’s exclusion of his defense that he relied on legal advice.
“Simmons is just an insurance broker,” Tuesday’s brief stated. “He is not now, and has never been, a CPA or tax attorney or a person who prepares tax returns for others.”
Final Arguments and Representation
Both Kohn and Simmons argued that prosecutors improperly modified the indictment at the close of evidence, which should not have been allowed.
