allege specific intent in its claim that defendant deliberately refused to make a federal income tax
return. Motion to Dismiss Information for Failure to State Essential Elements [#11] (“MTD #3”)
at 2. Defendant seeks to dismiss Counts Two, Four, and Six for failure to allege that defendant,
with deliberate intent, refused to make a D.C. tax return and pay all income taxes. Id. at 3.
Further, defendant argues that those three counts should be dismissed for failure to allege an an
essential element: that the prosecution was in the name of the District of Columbia, not in the
name of the United States. Id. at 4.
The government argues that the appropriate mens rea of the crimes charged is
“willfulness,” which is charged in the Information and is defined as a “voluntary, intentional
violation of a known legal duty.” Gov’s Opp. at 7-8 (citing Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S.
192, 199 (1991); United States v. Pomponio, 429 U.S. 10, 12 (1976)); see also Gov’s Opp. at 8-9
(citing United States v. Shorter, 618 F. Supp. 255, 256 (D.D.C. 1985) (internal citations
omitted)). The Information alleges willful conduct on the part of defendant in each of the
counts; therefore, defendant’s motion will be denied.
IV. Motion to Force an Election of, or to Dismiss, Duplicitous Charges in Counts Two,
Four, and Six
Defendant alleges that Counts Two, Four, and Six charge two separate acts: (1) failure to
make a return; and (2) failure to pay all taxes due. Motion to Force an Election of, or to Dismiss,
Duplicitous Charges in Counts Two, Four, and Six, [## 12-13] (“MTD #4”) at 7. Defendant
argues that each offense should be in a separate count, or defendant could face an unfair jury
trial. Id. at 3. Accordingly, the defendant moves the Court to dismiss the counts or force the
government to choose between the two charges in each count. Id. at 8. The government argues
that, “[b]ecause D.C. Code § 47-4103(a) lists in the disjunctive the ways in which an individual