United States District Court, D. Nevada
D. George, United States District Judge.
defendant, Jeffrey R. Nowak, moves for a new trial pursuant
to Rule 33 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure (ECF
No. 178), which motion the Government opposes (ECF No. 184).
argues that the government first disclosed, at his
sentencing, that it had forgiven the 2006 tax liability of
Ramzi Suliman, a co-defendant who testified against him, as
part of Suliman's plea agreement. He asserts that this
evidence was material to (but not merely impeaching of)
Suliman's credibility. The Court disagrees that the
government's disclosure-that the calculation of the
amount Suliman owed as restitution did not include
Suliman's tax liability for 2006-is newly discovered
evidence that is material and would, if introduced at a new
trial, probably result in Nowak's acquittal. Accordingly,
the Court will deny the motion.
April 2013, the government indicted Nowak and Suliman for
conspiring to defraud the United States by evading federal
income taxes. As estimated in the indictment, Nowak owed
additional taxes in the amount of $569, 013 for the 2006-2009
tax years and Suliman owed additional taxes of $606, 169 for
the same period.
2014, Suliman entered into a plea agreement and pled guilty.
Pursuant to the plea agreement, Suliman agreed “to make
full restitution in the amount of $428, 003.” The
parties also agreed that “[t]he Plea Agreement sets
forth the parties' agreement regarding criminal charges
referenced in the Plea Agreement and applicable sentences,
fines and restitution. It does not control or prohibit the
United States or any agency or third party from seeking any
other civil or administrative remedies directly or indirectly
against the defendant.”
testified as a government witness against Nowak at
Nowak's trial in August 2016. During cross-examination by
Nowak, Suliman testified as follows:
Q: Now, in your Plea Agreement, what was the amount of tax
that you were supposed to pay to the Internal Revenue
A: Uh . . . the amount of . . . I owe?
A: I think it was 600 something based on the numbers they
had. But then I had to pay with the plea bargain, you know.
There was 428, 000 I had to pay and I paid it.
Q: So the Indictment said Ramzi Sulliman owes over $600, 000
but the Plea Agreement says you only have to pay 428, 000; is
A: I think they ...