« Fascinating Eighth Circuit case on restitution | Main | Split verdict in Wesley Snipes trial ... and another potential high-profile acquitted conduct case »

February 1, 2008

First Survivor winner voted loser in First Circuit

Survivor

Just in time for next week's premier of Survivor: Micronesia - Fans vs. Favorites, the First Circuit today affirmed in this long opinion the federal convictions and sentence of Richard Hatch, who won the first installment of the reality TV show "Survivor."  Here is how the 52-page ruling starts:

Appellant-defendant Richard Hatch, the first winner of the CBS reality tv show "Survivor," appeals from his convictions and sentence on three counts of filing false tax returns, in violation of 26 U.S.C. ยงยง 7201 and 7206(1), after a jury trial in the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island.

Hatch makes four arguments on appeal: (1) that the district court violated his Sixth Amendment rights by curtailing Hatch's explanation of why he believed the show's producers had paid the taxes on his "Survivor" winnings; (2) that, in a variety of ways, the court improperly limited the defense's right to crossexamine; (3) that the court wrongly allowed the government to use what Hatch calls "unqualified experts" while excluding some of the testimony of Hatch's own expert; and (4) that his sentence was unreasonably harsh.  After reviewing the record and the arguments, we affirm the convictions on all three counts and the sentence.

February 1, 2008 at 04:21 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200e5502219e68834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference First Survivor winner voted loser in First Circuit:

» CA1: More on Hatch (Survivor) from Appellate Law
Over here, we covered the fact that the First Circuit affirmed the tax evasion convictions of that guy on survivor. Whatever. I hated the show. I hated the fact that people talked about it. It hurt America. People that talked [Read More]

Tracked on Feb 4, 2008 1:47:45 PM

Comments

DEAR SIR;

I AM A CRIMINAL JUSTICE MASTERS DEGREE PROGARAM STUDENT.

I APPEARS THE JUDGE IN THIS CASE AHS VIOLATED THE JUDICAL CARDNIAL RULE AND IGONRE THE PRVIOUS AGREEMENT OF 2004 IN WWHICH THE PROPER VENUE WAS WITH THE EIGHT JUDICAL CIRUIT COURT AND THE IRS HAS VIOLATED THE AGREEEMENT AND WILL COST THE US GOVERNMENT 10 TIMES THE LAST SETTLMENT AMOUNT--LOST COUNT AT 25 FIGURES AND IT KEEPS GOING UP.

LETS SEE WAHT HAPPENS IN THE NEXT FEW DAYS.

Posted by: JOHN R WALDEN | Feb 15, 2008 2:51:39 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB