TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Snipes Changes Attorneys In Tax Case

ADVERTISEMENT

By ELAINE SILVESTRINI, The Tampa Tribune

Published: October 5, 2007

TAMPA - Less than three weeks before he is set to go on trial on tax evasion charges, actor Wesley Snipes has fired his high-powered legal team and hired a Milwaukee lawyer who has had his own brush with the IRS.

Until recently, Snipes' five-member legal team included Washington lawyer Billy Martin, whose clients include Atlanta Falcons football player Michael Vick, who has pleaded guilty to involvement in a dog-fighting ring, and Idaho Sen. Larry Craig, who lost a bid to overturn his guilty plea relating to his activities in an airport men's room.

As recently as Sept. 17, Martin filed court pleadings on behalf of Snipes seeking to have the actor's trial held separately from his co-defendants on the grounds the co-defendants are members of a tax protest movement to which Snipes does not belong. Martin wrote that the co-defendants' anti-tax arguments are 'not meritorious.'

'Mr. Snipes is not a tax protestor and will not be relying on tax protestor arguments in trial,' Martin's brief says. 'Mr. Snipes' defense is that he relied upon defendants Eddie Ray Kahn and Douglas P. Rosile with a good-faith belief that he was being provided tax advice in compliance with the law as it is written and interpreted.' The motion to sever the cases was denied.

Martin wrote in his brief that the co-defendants 'have been ordered to cease and desist from providing this false information to over 2,000 clients of the American Rights Litigators that were in the same position as Mr. Snipes.'

On Wednesday, according to court filings, Martin and the rest of Snipes' legal team filed emergency motions to withdraw as Snipes' attorneys. In their place, Milwaukee lawyer Robert G. Bernhoft notified the court he was seeking to represent Snipes.

Accused Of 'False Representations'

Federal authorities 10 years ago ordered Bernhoft and another man to stop selling an 'abusive tax shelter' called the 'De-Taxing America Program' advertised in local newspapers under the caption 'Just Say No,' telling people the IRS 'has no statutory authority' to compel tax returns or require withholding from paychecks.

That order was upheld in 2000 by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, which said that the statements Bernhoft and his co-defendant made in their advertisements were 'clearly false representations concerning the government's authority to tax its citizens.'

Dow Jones News Service reported in 2001 that the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take Bernhoft's appeal. In court documents, his lawyer described the two defendants as 'prominent, highly visible members of the Constitution Party.'

The party, known until 1996 as the U.S. Taxpayers Party 'is nationally known for its outspoken criticism of the IRS,' Dow Jones reported.

It was not clear whether Bernhoft's role in the case signifies a changed legal strategy for Snipes.

Motion For Delay Denied

Bernhoft, according to media reports and his law firm's Web site, represented Snipes in a paternity case.

He also has represented other tax protesters, with mixed results. His legal arguments about taxes appear to have evolved.

Last year, for example, Bernhoft argued that a client in Milwaukee had 'made some very serious mistakes' and had been drawn into a web of erroneous ideas and conclusions promoted by an organization that helped clients launder money and evade taxes, according to a report in the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

The client was sentenced to 41 months in prison and fined $10,000 on charges he falsified returns while participating in a tax shelter scam, according to the report.

In 2005, Bernhoft represented a former IRS investigator who was acquitted of charges he helped prepare false tax returns, according to a report in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

In Snipes' case, Bernhoft filed an emergency motion to delay the Oct. 22 trial on the grounds he doesn't have enough time to prepare. Among other things, he maintained in the motion that Martin had failed to raise important legal questions, including 'serious grand jury abuse.'

U.S. District Judge William Terrell Hodges immediately denied the motion, writing in an order that developments in the case 'would lead any reasonable person to suspect that the defendant's dismissal of able counsel is nothing more than a ploy designed to force a continuance of the trial.'

Neither Bernhoft nor Martin could be reached for comment Thursday.

Researcher Melanie Coon contributed to this report. Reporter Elaine Silvestrini can be reached at (813) 259-7837 or esilvestrini@ tampatrib.com.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT