Graduate Studies Reports Access
Graduate Course Proposal Form Submission Detail - ACG6688
Tracking Number - 5270
Edit function not enabled for this course.
Current Status:
SCNS Liaison Notified of Graduate Council Approval - 2016-03-29
Campus: St Petersburg
Submission Type: Change
Course Change Information (for course changes only): The ACG 6688 course is normally taken by graduate accounting students admitted to the Master of Accountancy program or the MBA. These students would already have met all the pre-requisite courses currently listed (ACG 3103, ACG 3113, ACG 3401, and ACG 4632). It is redundant to list all of the pre-requisite courses that would already be fulfilled by students with an undergraduate degree in accounting from an accredited school. The rationale for requiring ACG 2021 as the only formal pre-requisite is that the ACG 6688 course can now be taken by other graduate students at USFSP and the USF system in general, who have an interest in Forensic Investigations, such as graduate students in Criminology, though it would not be limited to just these students. For any graduate student admitted who does not have an undergraduate degree in accounting, the ACG 2021 pre-requisite ensures that they have taken a basic course in accounting in order to comprehend the material covered in ACG 6688. In summary, the new pre-requisites for the course ACG 6688 are: (1) Admission to Graduate School; and (2) ACG 2021.
Comments: USFSP approved. TO USF Sys 3/21/16. To SCNS 3/29/16
Detail Information
- Date & Time Submitted: 2015-09-21
- Department: School of Accountancy
- College: BP
- Budget Account Number: 140100
- Contact Person: James Fellows
- Phone: 34587
- Email: fellows@mail.usf.edu
- Prefix: ACG
- Number: 6688
- Full Title: FORENSIC ACCOUNTING AND THE LEGAL ENVIRONMENT
- Credit Hours: 3
- Section Type: D -
Discussion (Primarily)
- Is the course title variable?: N
- Is a permit required for registration?: N
- Are the credit hours variable?: N
- Is this course repeatable?: N
- If repeatable, how many times?: 0
- Abbreviated Title (30 characters maximum): Forensic Acc and Legal Environ
- Course Online?: H -
Face-to-face and blended (separate sections)
- Percentage Online: 75
- Grading Option:
R - Regular
- Prerequisites: ACG 2021
- Corequisites:
- Course Description: A course that exposes students to current methodologies and work performed by forensic accountants and auditors in uncovering defalcations and improprieties and will present contemporary fraud-prevention and detection techniques currently being utilized.
- Please briefly explain why it is necessary and/or desirable to add this course: Needed to meet state requirements, licensure, etc
- What is the need or demand for this course? (Indicate if this course is part of a required sequence in the major.) What other programs would this course service? Needed for professional accountants who are specializing in Forensic Accounting.
- Has this course been offered as Selected Topics/Experimental Topics course? If yes, how many times? Yes, 3 or more times
- What qualifications for training and/or experience are necessary to teach this course? (List minimum qualifications for the instructor.) Ph.D in Accounting or Juris Doctorate
- Objectives: This course is designed to achieve the following objectives.
1. To give students an appreciation of the scope, extent and importance of the law as well as the basic concepts, principles and rules of law that apply to forensic accounting;
2. To gain an understanding of the significance of the legal system in making decisions and solving forensic accounting problems;
3. To gain an appreciation of the Internet and other databases, such as Lexis-Nexis and ABI Inform;
4. To develop the ability to recognize the potential legal problems which may arise in a doubtful or complicated situation, and the necessity of consulting a lawyer;
5. To encourage and promote critical thinking, a skill necessary to succeed today as a forensic accountant. This means each student should be able to comprehend an unfocused set of facts, identify, and if possible, anticipate problems, and find acceptable solutions;
6. To improve the student’s communication skills. Each student should be able to locate, obtain, and organize information from both human and electronic sources. Each student will also learn to defend his or her views through written work; and
7. To help each student acquire a basic knowledge of legal topics that are pertinent to the practice of forensic accounting, both from a law enforcement viewpoint and the private practitioner perspective.
- Learning Outcomes: This course is designed to achieve the following student learning
outcomes:
1. To give students an appreciation of the scope, extent and importance of the law as well as the basic concepts, principles and rules of law that apply to forensic accounting;
2. To gain an understanding of the significance of the legal system in making decisions and solving forensic accounting problems;
3. To gain an appreciation of the Internet and other databases, such as Lexis-Nexis and ABI Inform;
4. To develop the ability to recognize the potential legal problems which may arise in a doubtful or complicated situation, and the necessity of consulting a lawyer;
5. To encourage and promote critical thinking, a skill necessary to succeed today as a forensic accountant. This means each student should be able to comprehend an unfocused set of facts, identify, and if possible, anticipate problems, and find acceptable solutions;
6. To improve the student’s communication skills. Each student should be able to locate, obtain, and organize information from both human and electronic sources. Each student will also learn to defend his or her views through written work; and
7. To help each student acquire a basic knowledge of legal topics that are pertinent to the practice of forensic accounting, both from a law enforcement viewpoint and the private practitioner perspective.
- Major Topics: Fraud Investigations
Accounting Fraud
Contemporary Forensic Skills
Legal Issues in Accounting Fraud
- Textbooks: Criminal Procedure: An Analysis of Cases and
Concepts, 5th ed. Whitebread and Slobogin
- Course Readings, Online Resources, and Other Purchases: SCHEDULE OF
ASSIGNMENTS:
Unit 1—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 23-Intro to the Grand Jury (Week #1 and 5)
Homework Problems
1. Please describe and explain how a grand jury gets evidence. Please provide an adequate explanation.
2. Discuss the difference between transactional and use immunity.
3. In Costello v. U.S. (1956), the Supreme Court ruled that a grand jury’s charge does not have to be supported by admissible evidence. The Supreme Court emphasized the historical character of the grand jury as a body of lay people free from technical rules. Other justifications not mentioned by the Court have since been offered as underlying the Costello rule. Please outline and describe these justifications.
Unit 2—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 2-The Exclusionary Rule (Week #s 2 and 3)
Homework Problems
1. Officer Jumpthegun has been investigating a string of credit card burglaries. While at a local supermarket she overhears another shopper say to his companion that “my neighbor Ralph Rabbit has been spending money like it’s going out of style.” Jumpthegun concludes that Rabbit must be the burglar she is seeking and she applies for a warrant to search Rabbit’s home, setting forth the conversation she heard in the supermarket as her probable cause showing. Magistrate Rubberstamp quickly reviews the application and issues the warrant, which, when executed by Jumpthegun, turns up evidence connecting Rabbit to the burglaries. On the defendant’s motion to suppress on the grounds that the warrant was defective, the prosecution concedes that probable cause to search was lacking but contends nonetheless that Jumpthegun acted in good faith and thus the Leon exception should apply. What result?
2. State police officers, armed with a valid warrant to arrest Peter Swope for the crime of defrauding the state welfare agency of $100,000, stopped Swope in his car on the Turnpike. He was taken into custody, and his auto was locked and left on the shoulder of the road. Later that day the state troopers returned and searched Swope’s car. They located a plastic bag on the passenger seat, which they brought back to the station and opened to find a large quantity of illegal explosives. Although the welfare fraud charges have been dropped, the prosecution intends to use the explosives in an upcoming trial for possession of illegal explosives. Swope’s counsel has filed a motion to suppress and has persuaded the court that because there was no probable cause to believe seizable items were present in the car, the search was unlawful. Is there any way the prosecution can nonetheless avoid suppression of the explosives? What if state police regulations require that vehicles of persons taken into custody on the open road be impounded and subjected to a prescribed inventory inspection?
3. On December 10, the managers of Woodward Apartments in Lundwick, N.C., notified their tenants in writing that an exterminating company would begin spraying apartments on December 15. Aparment B-2 of Woodward Apartments was leased to Tiffany Darstraum. On December 15, while working in Darstraum’s apartment, the exterminator discovered a locked closet in an upstairs bedroom. Brent Andrews and Carol Kencik, the apartment managers, unlocked the closet to allow extermination of the area inside. After gaining entry to the locked closet, Andrews, Kencik, and the exterminator observed artificial light devices, plant food, plant tools, and about 30 plants in planters that they recognized to be marijuana. The apartment managers called the police.
In response to the call, the Lundwick Police Department dispatched Patrolman Clay Polgers to the scene. Polgers, accompanied by Andrews and Kencik, entered Darstraum’s apartment and observed the plants inside the closet. Polgers removed everyone from the apartment and called narcotics detectives. When the detectives arrived, Polgers was standing at the front door. Also present were Kencik, Andrews, and the exterminator.
After interviewing Andrews, Kencik, and the exterminator, and Polgers, the detectives presented the magistrate with an affidavit in support of their request for a search warrant. After obtaining the warrant, the detectives conducted a search of Darstraum’s apartment and seized marijuana plants and paraphernalia.
Darstraum was charged with drug offenses and moved to suppress all evidence seized as a result of the search. The judge held a hearing on the motion, and at the hearing, one of the detectives testified that she would have attempted to obtain a warrant based solely on her conversation with the apartment managers and the exterminator.
How should the judge rule on Darstraum’s suppression motion?
Unit 3—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 3-The Law of Arrest and Ch. 6-Search Incident to Lawful Arrest (Week #s 4 and 5)
Homework Problems
1. The police were summoned by UPS employees who had a package that had been returned by the driver as “addressee unknown.” When opened, it was found to contain a large brick of a substance that the UPS testers determined was C4 explosive. After conducting a field test that confirmed that the substance was C4, the police resealed the package and placed it in the “undelivered” section at UPS. They then waited for someone to pick it up. A woman appeared later in the day, claimed the package, and departed. The police followed her to a home known to them to be that of a suspected terrorist. Within minutes after the woman entered the home with the package, the police entered, arrested both the woman and suspected terrorist, and seized the C4. Was this warrantless action lawful?
2. Informant Z told drug investigators that Maxy Mum had sold her cocaine on numerous occasions. The agents asked Informant to arrange another sale with Maxy, and it took place on Monday on the sidewalk outside Maxy’s apartment. The agents witnessed the transaction from a remote location. After later confirming that the substance sold by Maxy was cocaine, the agents asked Informant to arrange another sale for the next day to occur inside Maxy’s apartment. At the appointed time on Tuesday, Informant went into the apartment. She came out 15 minutes later and informed the agents that the sale had occurred and that a large quantity of cocaine remained on the premises. Fearing that the contraband might be sold off to others, the agents moved in immediately, arresting Maxy and seizing the cocaine. Was this warrantless action lawful?
3. Ned Numbers, an accountant, is suspected of masterminding a major tax fraud scheme. Armed with a warrant for his arrest, IRS agents entered his 15-room home in Boca Raton, found Ned sitting at his desk in the study, and placed him under arrest. While one agent removed Ned from the chair, frisked him, and cuffed him, a second opened the drawers of his desk. A list of clients (many of whom were suspected of participation in the fraud scheme) was found in Ned’s coat pocket, and an illegally imported pistol was discovered in his desk drawer. Could the agents lawfully seize these items?
Unit 4—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 4-Introduction to the Law of Searches (Week #s 6 and 7)
Homework Problems
1. Police Officer Berkel, with the permission of the landlord, entered a crawl space under Paul Parrott’s first floor apartment. The crawl space is used when repairing pipes and wiring, but neither the tenants nor the public has regular access to it. Officer Berkel spent two hours in the space and heard Parrott engage in what appeared to be numerous conversations about laundering money and providing funds to support terrorist activities. Was the information obtained by Berkel accomplished through a search within the meaning of the 4th Amendment? Provide your legal reasoning.
2. Frank Brazen owned an 1,800-acre cattle ranch containing an airstrip. The airstrip is some 2,000 feet from the house trailer where Brazen resided, in the middle of the ranch property. The police received a tip that a plane would be landing at 2 p.m. They crossed a dike, rammed through a gate blocking the entrance to the airfield, cut the chain lock on a second such gate, cut a fence posted “No Trespassing,” and then walked several hundred yards to hide behind a clump of bushes to conduct surveillance. When the plane landed, the officers saw bales of marijuana being unloaded from the plane. The officers arrested all doing the unloading, including Frank Brazen.
Brazen filed a suppression motion, which the trial court denied on the ground that the airstrip was in an open field; thus, there was no “search” and the 4th Amendment does not apply. The defense has appealed, and you are the defense lawyer making the argument to the appellate court on Brazen’s behalf. What will you argue and will you succeed?
3. Betty Bookkeeper became concerned that her employers at Flexible Plastics Company were cheating the government out of corporate taxes owed. She made several telephone calls to the IRS and spoke to Agent Clean. Based on the information she provided, Clean advised Betty that IRS policy prevented him from encouraging her to take any documents from her employer, but that it was IRS policy to accept documents voluntarily provided. Over the next several months, Betty provided corporate records, which established a case of major tax fraud against her employer. May Flexible Plastics raise 4th Amendment objections to the use of these documents at trial?
EXAM 1-an exam on units 1-4.
Unit 5—Federal Rules of Evidence (Week #s 7 and 8)
In addition to the lecture, please do these Homework problems:
Homework Problems
1. Rodney Coaker is detained at Miami Airport on suspicion of drug smuggling. Agents do not find major quantities of drugs in his luggage. However, they pass his clothing through a newly designed “cocaine spectrometer” which supposedly can detect miniscule amounts of cocaine. The spectrometer reports that there are trace quantities of cocaine in Coaker’s underwear. He is tried on federal cocaine-smuggling charges. At trial, the designer of the spectrometer testifies that the device is reliable, and that the results reported for Coaker’s underwear indicate that cocaine must have come in contact with the underwear shortly before the test. The design of the cocaine spectrometer has never been made public or subjected to peer review; nor has the device so far become generally accepted as a method of drug testing. Do these facts mean that the court should bar the use of the spectrometer evidence?
2. Claire Voyant is a recognized expert on ghosts. She is called to testify as an expert witness in a trial where an issue is whether the house of Mrs. Whatsit is haunted. Must Claire have personally examined the house in order to be able to testify as an expert?
3. Charles Kiting visits Attorney Myles Crooked and says, “I am planning on bilking millions of innocent people out of their life savings in a fraudulent real estate investment scheme and I need your help in setting it up.” Crooked agrees and they set to work. When Kiting is subsequently tried for fraud, Crooked is called as a witness by the state. Kiting objects to his testimony, claiming attorney/client privilege. How do you rule?
4. Bonnie and Clyde successfully rob a series of banks. After accumulating an adequate amount of cash, they settle down and marry. At Clyde’s subsequent federal trial for one of the bank robberies, the prosecution seeks to introduce Bonnie’s testimony as to conversations she and Clyde had at the time of the robbery. Bonnie is willing to testify, because she has been told it will help her get a lighter sentence when she is tried later. Clyde objects. Which, if either, of the marital privileges applies?
5. The Pied Piper sues the Mayor of Hamelin for breach of contract. To prove the contract’s terms, the Piper offers a photocopy of the contract into evidence, without explaining the whereabouts of the original. The Mayor objects, claiming the Best Evidence rule requires that Piper produce the original contract. How do you rule, under the FRE?
Unit 6—An Overview of Federal Statutes on Fraud, Money Laundering, and Terrorist Financing (Week #s 8 and 9)
Please read the following articles in addition to the lecture:
Jeremie, J.S. 2007. Caribbean terror. Journal of Financial Crime 18(4): 296-318.
Keene, S. 2011. Terrorism and the internet: A double-edged sword. Journal of Money Laundering Control 14(4): 359-370.
Simser, J. 2011. Terrorism financing and the threat to institutions. Journal of Money Laundering Control 14(4): 334-345.
Homework Problems
1. It is difficult to legislate against the financing of terrorism without defining what constitutes terrorism. As several scholars have noted, defining terrorism is a very difficult task. Recent legislative initiatives in various nations have adopted different approaches. Please describe and analyze the various approaches to defining terrorism.
2. Descriptions of criminal activities are listed below. For each description, identify all federal statutes that may have been violated that we have covered either in class lecture or a reading.
a. Jay Wilson owns a clothing store in Chicago. He agreed to let a drug dealer buy thousands of dollars of clothes there using $10, $20 and $50 bills that had been used to buy crack and cocaine on the streets.
b. Todd Averett is a high-ranking civil servant employed by the US Navy. He has ties with a sports agent. One of the contractors who works with Averett has a son who is sure to be the first player selected in the college football draft. Averett tells this contractor that he had better convince his son to sign with Averett’s sports agent friend or Averett will see to it that the contractor loses his job.
c. Alma Coe cons unsuspecting victims into buying bogus vacation packages by placing ads offering inexpensive vacations in newspapers and listing an 800 number for potential victims to call.
2. This problem is designed to help you identify the elements of a federal statute. The statute below is fictitious. Read the statute, determine the important elements of the crime that would need to be proven in a court of law.
Whoever, knowingly and with intent to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof, possesses any false, altered, forged, or counterfeited writing or document for the purpose of enabling another to obtain from the United States, or from any agency, officer, or agent thereof, any sum of money, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five year or both.
List the elements of the statute.
Unit 7—Securities Fraud, Conspiracy, and Obstruction of Justice (Week #s 9 and 10)
Securities Fraud, Conspiracy, and Obstruction of Justice
In addition to the lecture, please do the following readings:
H. Palmer, J. Klarfeld, M. Roussis, and J. Wash. 2010. Securities fraud. American Criminal Law Review 47: 1015-1087.
H. Sigler. 2010. Federal criminal conspiracy. American Criminal Law Review 46: 589-620.
J. Kasprisin. 2010. Obstruction of justice. American Criminal Law Review 47: 847-887.
Homework is to write a summary of one or any number of the articles.
Unit 8—Federal False Claims Act (Week #s 11)
In addition to the lecture, please read the following article:
Pacini, C. and M.B. Hood. 2007. The Role of Qui Tam Actions Under the False Claims Act in Preventing Fraud Against Government. University of Miami Business Law Review XV (2): 273-301.
The article can be found in Lexis-Nexis in the USF library electronic databases.
The homework assignment is to write a summary of the article.
Unit 9-Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Discovery (Week #s 12 and 13)
In addition to the lecture, please read the following articles:
Mehr, D. 2012. Excessive or Warranted? The Unshackling of Discovery Sanctions in Lee v. Max International, LLC. Brigham University Law Review 2012: 607-621.
Jenner, R. 2002. How to Attack Discovery Abuse. Trial 38(2): 28-33.
The articles can be found in Lexis-Nexis in the USF electronic databases.
The homework assignment is to write a summary of one or both articles.
Unit 10-Trusts and Other Offshore Entities (Week #13)
In addition to the lecture, please do the following readings:
Lansing, P. and N. Vohra. 2012. The Use of Secret Bank Accounts by Foreign National Depositors: The Swiss Bank Secrecy Crisis. International Journal of Management 29(2): 739-744.
Ausness, R. 2007. The Offshore Asset Protection Trust: A Prudent Financial Planning Device or the Last Refuge or a Scoundrel? Duquesne University Law Review 45: 147-193. (This article must be obtained from Lexis-Nexis in the USF electronic databases).
Also, please read the following two cases after you find them on Lexis-Nexis:
Alexander v. Thornburgh, 943 F.2d 825 (8th Cir. 1991).
FTC v. Affordable Media, 179 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir. 1999).
For homework, you may write a 1-3 page summary of an article or articles and/or brief a court case or cases.
Homework Problems
1. Although the structure of an offshore asset protection trust can be tailored to fit the particular needs of the settlor, there are some provisions that should be incorporated into every offshore trust agreement. Please outline and discuss some of these necessary provisions or features.
2. The majority of traditional offshore jurisdictions, such as Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, and the British Virgin Islands, are covered by the umbrella of the Privy Council (a judicial tribunal whose roots lie in the House of Lords. It is the highest appellate court in the Commomwealth). Such jurisdictions are bound by the decision in The Siskina (Siskina v. Distos Compania Naviera [1979] AC 210) when it comes to enforcement of a Mareva injunction. What is a Mareva injunction? What are the main legal principles of the Siskina?
3. Define the following types of trusts: (a) express, (b) testamentary, (c) inter vivos, (d) charitable, (e) spendthrift, (f) Totten, (g) implied, (h) constructive, and (i) resulting.
Unit 11-Expert Witness Testimony (Week #14)
In addition to the lecture, please do the following readings:
Drummond, M. 2009. Direct and Cross Examination of Experts. GP Solo, Vol. 26(6): 24-6.
Conta, J. 2010. How to Manage the Investigative Function Evaluating Expert Witnesses. Orange County Lawyer 52: 10-19.
(These articles are available from USF electronic databases).
Homework is to write a summary of one or both articles.
EXAM 2-all material from Unit 5 inclusive through the end of the course.
- Student Expectations/Requirements and Grading Policy: GRADING : Each student starts this class with an A. It is your job to
keep it.
Two exams will be given in this course. Each exam will
be a take-home test and will contain objective questions and possibly some essays. Each exam will be e-mailed to students (or be put on CANVAS) and must be completed within the allotted time provided. I will provide detailed information on time allotments in class lectures. The second exam may be comprehensive (cover all material from the entire semester). Each exam shall be done on an individual basis.
Each student’s grade will be based on the following:
Exam 1 150 points
Exam 2 150 points
Homework 50 points
Term Paper 150 points
Total Points 500 points
The grading scale for final grades is:
Grade Total Points
A 460-500
A- 445-459
B+ 435-444
B 415-434
B- 395-414
C+ 385-394
C 350-384
D 300-349
F Below 300
Any grade challenge to a test, homework assignment, project or assignment of any kind must be in writing to be considered. A written grade challenge must clearly describe what is being challenged and provide a rational basis for the challenge. No grade challenge will be considered for any test curved 5 points or more.
Make-up exams will not be given without the instructor’s approval. If you miss an exam without a reason approved by the instructor, you may receive a “0”. The instructor’s discretion is final.
Please bear in mind that you are responsible for all material assigned even if it is not covered in a class lecture. You are also responsible for material presented in class that is not covered in the textbook. You are also responsible for any outside reading material assigned by the instructor. Questions on outside reading material may show up on an exam. Please understand that just because certain material is not covered in a class lecture does not mean that it will not be on a test.
- Assignments, Exams and Tests: SCHEDULE OF
ASSIGNMENTS:
Unit 1—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 23-Intro to the Grand Jury (Week #1 and 5)
Homework Problems
1. Please describe and explain how a grand jury gets evidence. Please provide an adequate explanation.
2. Discuss the difference between transactional and use immunity.
3. In Costello v. U.S. (1956), the Supreme Court ruled that a grand jury’s charge does not have to be supported by admissible evidence. The Supreme Court emphasized the historical character of the grand jury as a body of lay people free from technical rules. Other justifications not mentioned by the Court have since been offered as underlying the Costello rule. Please outline and describe these justifications.
Unit 2—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 2-The Exclusionary Rule (Week #s 2 and 3)
Homework Problems
1. Officer Jumpthegun has been investigating a string of credit card burglaries. While at a local supermarket she overhears another shopper say to his companion that “my neighbor Ralph Rabbit has been spending money like it’s going out of style.” Jumpthegun concludes that Rabbit must be the burglar she is seeking and she applies for a warrant to search Rabbit’s home, setting forth the conversation she heard in the supermarket as her probable cause showing. Magistrate Rubberstamp quickly reviews the application and issues the warrant, which, when executed by Jumpthegun, turns up evidence connecting Rabbit to the burglaries. On the defendant’s motion to suppress on the grounds that the warrant was defective, the prosecution concedes that probable cause to search was lacking but contends nonetheless that Jumpthegun acted in good faith and thus the Leon exception should apply. What result?
2. State police officers, armed with a valid warrant to arrest Peter Swope for the crime of defrauding the state welfare agency of $100,000, stopped Swope in his car on the Turnpike. He was taken into custody, and his auto was locked and left on the shoulder of the road. Later that day the state troopers returned and searched Swope’s car. They located a plastic bag on the passenger seat, which they brought back to the station and opened to find a large quantity of illegal explosives. Although the welfare fraud charges have been dropped, the prosecution intends to use the explosives in an upcoming trial for possession of illegal explosives. Swope’s counsel has filed a motion to suppress and has persuaded the court that because there was no probable cause to believe seizable items were present in the car, the search was unlawful. Is there any way the prosecution can nonetheless avoid suppression of the explosives? What if state police regulations require that vehicles of persons taken into custody on the open road be impounded and subjected to a prescribed inventory inspection?
3. On December 10, the managers of Woodward Apartments in Lundwick, N.C., notified their tenants in writing that an exterminating company would begin spraying apartments on December 15. Aparment B-2 of Woodward Apartments was leased to Tiffany Darstraum. On December 15, while working in Darstraum’s apartment, the exterminator discovered a locked closet in an upstairs bedroom. Brent Andrews and Carol Kencik, the apartment managers, unlocked the closet to allow extermination of the area inside. After gaining entry to the locked closet, Andrews, Kencik, and the exterminator observed artificial light devices, plant food, plant tools, and about 30 plants in planters that they recognized to be marijuana. The apartment managers called the police.
In response to the call, the Lundwick Police Department dispatched Patrolman Clay Polgers to the scene. Polgers, accompanied by Andrews and Kencik, entered Darstraum’s apartment and observed the plants inside the closet. Polgers removed everyone from the apartment and called narcotics detectives. When the detectives arrived, Polgers was standing at the front door. Also present were Kencik, Andrews, and the exterminator.
After interviewing Andrews, Kencik, and the exterminator, and Polgers, the detectives presented the magistrate with an affidavit in support of their request for a search warrant. After obtaining the warrant, the detectives conducted a search of Darstraum’s apartment and seized marijuana plants and paraphernalia.
Darstraum was charged with drug offenses and moved to suppress all evidence seized as a result of the search. The judge held a hearing on the motion, and at the hearing, one of the detectives testified that she would have attempted to obtain a warrant based solely on her conversation with the apartment managers and the exterminator.
How should the judge rule on Darstraum’s suppression motion?
Unit 3—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 3-The Law of Arrest and Ch. 6-Search Incident to Lawful Arrest (Week #s 4 and 5)
Homework Problems
1. The police were summoned by UPS employees who had a package that had been returned by the driver as “addressee unknown.” When opened, it was found to contain a large brick of a substance that the UPS testers determined was C4 explosive. After conducting a field test that confirmed that the substance was C4, the police resealed the package and placed it in the “undelivered” section at UPS. They then waited for someone to pick it up. A woman appeared later in the day, claimed the package, and departed. The police followed her to a home known to them to be that of a suspected terrorist. Within minutes after the woman entered the home with the package, the police entered, arrested both the woman and suspected terrorist, and seized the C4. Was this warrantless action lawful?
2. Informant Z told drug investigators that Maxy Mum had sold her cocaine on numerous occasions. The agents asked Informant to arrange another sale with Maxy, and it took place on Monday on the sidewalk outside Maxy’s apartment. The agents witnessed the transaction from a remote location. After later confirming that the substance sold by Maxy was cocaine, the agents asked Informant to arrange another sale for the next day to occur inside Maxy’s apartment. At the appointed time on Tuesday, Informant went into the apartment. She came out 15 minutes later and informed the agents that the sale had occurred and that a large quantity of cocaine remained on the premises. Fearing that the contraband might be sold off to others, the agents moved in immediately, arresting Maxy and seizing the cocaine. Was this warrantless action lawful?
3. Ned Numbers, an accountant, is suspected of masterminding a major tax fraud scheme. Armed with a warrant for his arrest, IRS agents entered his 15-room home in Boca Raton, found Ned sitting at his desk in the study, and placed him under arrest. While one agent removed Ned from the chair, frisked him, and cuffed him, a second opened the drawers of his desk. A list of clients (many of whom were suspected of participation in the fraud scheme) was found in Ned’s coat pocket, and an illegally imported pistol was discovered in his desk drawer. Could the agents lawfully seize these items?
Unit 4—Slobogin & Whitebread: Ch. 4-Introduction to the Law of Searches (Week #s 6 and 7)
Homework Problems
1. Police Officer Berkel, with the permission of the landlord, entered a crawl space under Paul Parrott’s first floor apartment. The crawl space is used when repairing pipes and wiring, but neither the tenants nor the public has regular access to it. Officer Berkel spent two hours in the space and heard Parrott engage in what appeared to be numerous conversations about laundering money and providing funds to support terrorist activities. Was the information obtained by Berkel accomplished through a search within the meaning of the 4th Amendment? Provide your legal reasoning.
2. Frank Brazen owned an 1,800-acre cattle ranch containing an airstrip. The airstrip is some 2,000 feet from the house trailer where Brazen resided, in the middle of the ranch property. The police received a tip that a plane would be landing at 2 p.m. They crossed a dike, rammed through a gate blocking the entrance to the airfield, cut the chain lock on a second such gate, cut a fence posted “No Trespassing,” and then walked several hundred yards to hide behind a clump of bushes to conduct surveillance. When the plane landed, the officers saw bales of marijuana being unloaded from the plane. The officers arrested all doing the unloading, including Frank Brazen.
Brazen filed a suppression motion, which the trial court denied on the ground that the airstrip was in an open field; thus, there was no “search” and the 4th Amendment does not apply. The defense has appealed, and you are the defense lawyer making the argument to the appellate court on Brazen’s behalf. What will you argue and will you succeed?
3. Betty Bookkeeper became concerned that her employers at Flexible Plastics Company were cheating the government out of corporate taxes owed. She made several telephone calls to the IRS and spoke to Agent Clean. Based on the information she provided, Clean advised Betty that IRS policy prevented him from encouraging her to take any documents from her employer, but that it was IRS policy to accept documents voluntarily provided. Over the next several months, Betty provided corporate records, which established a case of major tax fraud against her employer. May Flexible Plastics raise 4th Amendment objections to the use of these documents at trial?
EXAM 1-an exam on units 1-4.
Unit 5—Federal Rules of Evidence (Week #s 7 and 8)
In addition to the lecture, please do these Homework problems:
Homework Problems
1. Rodney Coaker is detained at Miami Airport on suspicion of drug smuggling. Agents do not find major quantities of drugs in his luggage. However, they pass his clothing through a newly designed “cocaine spectrometer” which supposedly can detect miniscule amounts of cocaine. The spectrometer reports that there are trace quantities of cocaine in Coaker’s underwear. He is tried on federal cocaine-smuggling charges. At trial, the designer of the spectrometer testifies that the device is reliable, and that the results reported for Coaker’s underwear indicate that cocaine must have come in contact with the underwear shortly before the test. The design of the cocaine spectrometer has never been made public or subjected to peer review; nor has the device so far become generally accepted as a method of drug testing. Do these facts mean that the court should bar the use of the spectrometer evidence?
2. Claire Voyant is a recognized expert on ghosts. She is called to testify as an expert witness in a trial where an issue is whether the house of Mrs. Whatsit is haunted. Must Claire have personally examined the house in order to be able to testify as an expert?
3. Charles Kiting visits Attorney Myles Crooked and says, “I am planning on bilking millions of innocent people out of their life savings in a fraudulent real estate investment scheme and I need your help in setting it up.” Crooked agrees and they set to work. When Kiting is subsequently tried for fraud, Crooked is called as a witness by the state. Kiting objects to his testimony, claiming attorney/client privilege. How do you rule?
4. Bonnie and Clyde successfully rob a series of banks. After accumulating an adequate amount of cash, they settle down and marry. At Clyde’s subsequent federal trial for one of the bank robberies, the prosecution seeks to introduce Bonnie’s testimony as to conversations she and Clyde had at the time of the robbery. Bonnie is willing to testify, because she has been told it will help her get a lighter sentence when she is tried later. Clyde objects. Which, if either, of the marital privileges applies?
5. The Pied Piper sues the Mayor of Hamelin for breach of contract. To prove the contract’s terms, the Piper offers a photocopy of the contract into evidence, without explaining the whereabouts of the original. The Mayor objects, claiming the Best Evidence rule requires that Piper produce the original contract. How do you rule, under the FRE?
Unit 6—An Overview of Federal Statutes on Fraud, Money Laundering, and Terrorist Financing (Week #s 8 and 9)
Please read the following articles in addition to the lecture:
Jeremie, J.S. 2007. Caribbean terror. Journal of Financial Crime 18(4): 296-318.
Keene, S. 2011. Terrorism and the internet: A double-edged sword. Journal of Money Laundering Control 14(4): 359-370.
Simser, J. 2011. Terrorism financing and the threat to institutions. Journal of Money Laundering Control 14(4): 334-345.
Homework Problems
1. It is difficult to legislate against the financing of terrorism without defining what constitutes terrorism. As several scholars have noted, defining terrorism is a very difficult task. Recent legislative initiatives in various nations have adopted different approaches. Please describe and analyze the various approaches to defining terrorism.
2. Descriptions of criminal activities are listed below. For each description, identify all federal statutes that may have been violated that we have covered either in class lecture or a reading.
a. Jay Wilson owns a clothing store in Chicago. He agreed to let a drug dealer buy thousands of dollars of clothes there using $10, $20 and $50 bills that had been used to buy crack and cocaine on the streets.
b. Todd Averett is a high-ranking civil servant employed by the US Navy. He has ties with a sports agent. One of the contractors who works with Averett has a son who is sure to be the first player selected in the college football draft. Averett tells this contractor that he had better convince his son to sign with Averett’s sports agent friend or Averett will see to it that the contractor loses his job.
c. Alma Coe cons unsuspecting victims into buying bogus vacation packages by placing ads offering inexpensive vacations in newspapers and listing an 800 number for potential victims to call.
2. This problem is designed to help you identify the elements of a federal statute. The statute below is fictitious. Read the statute, determine the important elements of the crime that would need to be proven in a court of law.
Whoever, knowingly and with intent to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof, possesses any false, altered, forged, or counterfeited writing or document for the purpose of enabling another to obtain from the United States, or from any agency, officer, or agent thereof, any sum of money, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five year or both.
List the elements of the statute.
Unit 7—Securities Fraud, Conspiracy, and Obstruction of Justice (Week #s 9 and 10)
Securities Fraud, Conspiracy, and Obstruction of Justice
In addition to the lecture, please do the following readings:
H. Palmer, J. Klarfeld, M. Roussis, and J. Wash. 2010. Securities fraud. American Criminal Law Review 47: 1015-1087.
H. Sigler. 2010. Federal criminal conspiracy. American Criminal Law Review 46: 589-620.
J. Kasprisin. 2010. Obstruction of justice. American Criminal Law Review 47: 847-887.
Homework is to write a summary of one or any number of the articles.
Unit 8—Federal False Claims Act (Week #s 11)
In addition to the lecture, please read the following article:
Pacini, C. and M.B. Hood. 2007. The Role of Qui Tam Actions Under the False Claims Act in Preventing Fraud Against Government. University of Miami Business Law Review XV (2): 273-301.
The article can be found in Lexis-Nexis in the USF library electronic databases.
The homework assignment is to write a summary of the article.
Unit 9-Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Discovery (Week #s 12 and 13)
In addition to the lecture, please read the following articles:
Mehr, D. 2012. Excessive or Warranted? The Unshackling of Discovery Sanctions in Lee v. Max International, LLC. Brigham University Law Review 2012: 607-621.
Jenner, R. 2002. How to Attack Discovery Abuse. Trial 38(2): 28-33.
The articles can be found in Lexis-Nexis in the USF electronic databases.
The homework assignment is to write a summary of one or both articles.
Unit 10-Trusts and Other Offshore Entities (Week #13)
In addition to the lecture, please do the following readings:
Lansing, P. and N. Vohra. 2012. The Use of Secret Bank Accounts by Foreign National Depositors: The Swiss Bank Secrecy Crisis. International Journal of Management 29(2): 739-744.
Ausness, R. 2007. The Offshore Asset Protection Trust: A Prudent Financial Planning Device or the Last Refuge or a Scoundrel? Duquesne University Law Review 45: 147-193. (This article must be obtained from Lexis-Nexis in the USF electronic databases).
Also, please read the following two cases after you find them on Lexis-Nexis:
Alexander v. Thornburgh, 943 F.2d 825 (8th Cir. 1991).
FTC v. Affordable Media, 179 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir. 1999).
For homework, you may write a 1-3 page summary of an article or articles and/or brief a court case or cases.
Homework Problems
1. Although the structure of an offshore asset protection trust can be tailored to fit the particular needs of the settlor, there are some provisions that should be incorporated into every offshore trust agreement. Please outline and discuss some of these necessary provisions or features.
2. The majority of traditional offshore jurisdictions, such as Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, and the British Virgin Islands, are covered by the umbrella of the Privy Council (a judicial tribunal whose roots lie in the House of Lords. It is the highest appellate court in the Commomwealth). Such jurisdictions are bound by the decision in The Siskina (Siskina v. Distos Compania Naviera [1979] AC 210) when it comes to enforcement of a Mareva injunction. What is a Mareva injunction? What are the main legal principles of the Siskina?
3. Define the following types of trusts: (a) express, (b) testamentary, (c) inter vivos, (d) charitable, (e) spendthrift, (f) Totten, (g) implied, (h) constructive, and (i) resulting.
Unit 11-Expert Witness Testimony (Week #14)
In addition to the lecture, please do the following readings:
Drummond, M. 2009. Direct and Cross Examination of Experts. GP Solo, Vol. 26(6): 24-6.
Conta, J. 2010. How to Manage the Investigative Function Evaluating Expert Witnesses. Orange County Lawyer 52: 10-19.
(These articles are available from USF electronic databases).
Homework is to write a summary of one or both articles.
EXAM 2-all material from Unit 5 inclusive through the end of the course.
- Attendance Policy: Course Attendance at First Class Meeting – Policy for Graduate Students: For structured courses, 6000 and above, the College/Campus Dean will set the first-day class attendance requirement. Check with the College for specific information. This policy is not applicable to courses in the following categories: Educational Outreach, Open University (TV), FEEDS Program, Community Experiential Learning (CEL), Cooperative Education Training, and courses that do not have regularly scheduled meeting days/times (such as, directed reading/research or study, individual research, thesis, dissertation, internship, practica, etc.). Students are responsible for dropping undesired courses in these categories by the 5th day of classes to avoid fee liability and academic penalty. (See USF Regulation – Registration - 4.0101,
http://usfweb2.usf.edu/usfgc/ogc%20web/currentreg.htm)
Attendance Policy for the Observance of Religious Days by Students: In accordance with Sections 1006.53 and 1001.74(10)(g) Florida Statutes and Board of Governors Regulation 6C-6.0115, the University of South Florida (University/USF) has established the following policy regarding religious observances: (http://usfweb2.usf.edu/usfgc/gc_pp/acadaf/gc10-045.htm)
In the event of an emergency, it may be necessary for USF to suspend normal operations. During this time, USF may opt to continue delivery of instruction through methods that include but are not limited to: Blackboard, Elluminate, Skype, and email messaging and/or an alternate schedule. It’s the responsibility of the student to monitor Blackboard site for each class for course specific communication, and the main USF, College, and department websites, emails, and MoBull messages for important general information.
- Policy on Make-up Work: CLASS
PARTICIPATION: Participation and completion of assignments are considered minimum requirements for all students. Penalties may be assessed in the final determination of your course grade for unreasonable deficiencies in either or both of these requirements. The penalty may take the form of a reduction in letter grade, the assignment of a failing grade or a grade of incomplete. This penalty assessment policy applies regardless of performance on written examinations and the form of the penalty is at the discretion of the instructor. Attendance is required for the three live classes on-campus unless you are excused by the professor.
Make-up exams will not be given without the instructor’s approval. If you miss an exam without a reason approved by the instructor, you may receive a “0”. The instructor’s discretion is final.
Disability
Accommodation: USF encourages academically qualified students with disabilities to take advantage of its educational programs. Students with disabilities who may need accommodations for this class should contact R. Barry McDowell, St. Petersburg Campus, TER 200 (727) 873-4940 (mcdowell@stpt.usf.edu)
Academic integrity is the pursuit of scholarly activity in an open, honest, and responsible manner. It is a basic guiding principle for all academic activity at the University of South Florida, and all members of the University community are expected to act in accordance with this principle. Consistent with this expectation, the University’s Code of Conduct states that all students should act with personal integrity, respect other students’ dignity, rights and property, and help create and maintain an environment in which all can succeed through the fruits of their efforts.
Academic integrity includes a commitment not to engage in or tolerate acts of falsification, misrepresentation, or deception. Such acts of dishonesty violate the fundamental ethical principles of the University community and compromise the worth of work completed by others.
The following practices constitute, for purposes of this policy, violations of Academic Integrity:
• Cheating—using a crib sheet, preprogramming a calculator, using books or notes during a closed book exam, etc.
• Copying on a test—looking at another unsuspecting student’s exam and copying; copying in a complicit manner with another student; exchanging color-coded exams for the purpose of copying; passing answers via notes; discussing answers in an exam, etc.
• Plagiarism—the fabrication of information and citations; submitting others’ work from professional journals, books, articles and papers; submission of other students’ papers or lab results or project reports and representing the work as one’s own; fabricating in part or total, submissions and citing them falsely, etc.
• Acts of Aiding and Abetting—facilitating acts of academic dishonesty by others; unauthorized collaboration of work; permitting another to copy from one’s exam; writing a paper for another; inappropriately collaborating on a home assignment or exam without permission when prohibited, etc.
• Unauthorized Possession—of examinations, through purchase or supply; stealing exams; failing to return exams on file; selling exams; photocopying exams; buying exams; and possession of an exam without the custodian’s permission, etc.
• Submitting Previous Work—submitting a paper, case study, lab report or any assignment that had been submitted for credit in a prior class without the knowledge and permission of the instructor.
- Program This Course Supports: USFSP Program of Accountancy Master of Accountancy
- Course Concurrence Information: USF-Tampa Master of Accountancy
- if you have questions about any of these fields, please contact chinescobb@grad.usf.edu or joe@grad.usf.edu.