WHETHER JURY INSTRUCTIONS BY THE DISTRICT COURT, ON ONE OF THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE TAX CONVICTION, I.E., WILLFULNESS, BE IMPROPER, IF THEY DISREGARD THE CRIMINAL DEFENDANT'S "SUBJECTIVE VIEWS" & "INTENT" AS TO THAT ELEMENT ?

DOES A "SUBJECTIVE" GOOD FAITH BELIEF THAT ONE IS NOT VIOLATING THE LAW OR A GOOD FAITH MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW NEGATE WILLFULNESS [MUCH LIKE THE "RUAN" CASE]

WOULD THE APPELLATE COURT'S MISINTERPRETATION OF THE SCOTUS GRANT OF CERTIORARI IN A SIMILAR PRECEDENT CASE [ THE "CHEEK" CASE] WHERE THE DEFENDANT'S TAX CONVICTIONS WERE VACATED, WHEN NOT PROPERLY APPLIED TO THE PETITIONER 'S CASE, BE NOT CONSIDERED, AN ERROR ?

IS THE CRIMINAL DEFENDANT'S STATE OF MIND, AS SEEN THROUGH HIS EYES, KEEPING IN VIEW THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN GOING THROUGH, AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, DURING THE COMMISSION OF THE ALLEGED CRIME, BE OF ANY LEGAL IMPORT, APRPOS THE "WILLFULNESS ELEMENT" OF THE CHARGES ?

WHETHER SUCH AS ERROR AS MENTIONED IN QUESTION ONE, WHEN RESULTING IN CONVICTION [ AS IT DID IN THE PETITIONER'S CASE] NOT BE GROUNDS FOR THE SCOTUS TO GRANT A WRIT OF CERTIORARI ?

whether-jury-instructions-on-willfulness-element-disregarded-defendant's-subjective-intent