Appeals Re Convictions for Medicare Fraud and Concealing Material Facts Re Nuclear Power Plant Incident - Criminal Law - U.S. Sixth Circuit
U.S. Sixth Circuit - The FindLaw 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

Appeals Re Convictions for Medicare Fraud and Concealing Material Facts Re Nuclear Power Plant Incident

US v. Williams, 09-3521, concerned a challenge to the district court's conviction of a defendant for fraudulently overbilling Medicare, Medicaid, and several private insurance companies as an employee of a psychiatric medical practice, and a sentence of 12 months of probation and a restitution order in the amount of $822,459.21.  First, the court rejected defendant's challenge to the district court's deliberate-ignorance jury instruction and, dismissed defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim as it was premature.  Next, the court went onto hold that the district court did not err in ordering defendant to pay restitution and, that defendant failed to demonstrate that the district court plainly erred under the Due Process Clause when it entered the order of restitution against him.  However, given certain irregularities, district court's order of restitution is vacated and remanded so that the court may properly rule on defendant's upcoding argument under Rule 32(i)(3)(B).

US v. Siemaszko, 09-3167, concerned a challenge to a conviction of defendant for concealing material facts and making false statements to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in violation of 18 U.S.C. sections 1001 and 1002, arising from a safety incident at a nuclear power plant where defendant worked as a systems engineer.  In affirming, the court held that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant's convictions and, that defendant failed to establish that a constructive amendment of the indictment occurred.

US v. Geisen, 08-3655, concerned a challenge to a conviction of a defendant for concealing a material fact and making a false statement to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in violation of 18 U.S.C. sections 1001 and 1002, arising from a safety incident at a nuclear power station.  In affirming, the court held that the district court's deliberate-ignorance jury instruction was not improper as the government presented ample evidence from which a rational jury could infer that defendant deliberately chose not to inform himself in preparing the submissions to the NRC.  The court also held that there was sufficient evidence to support defendant's convictions and, that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of defendant's rejection of the deferred prosecution agreement (DPA).

Related Resources: