Federal Criminal Defense Blog : Georgia Federal Criminal Defense Lawyer & Attorney : Gillen Withers & Lake Law Firm : White Collar Crime, RICO, Trial : Atlanta, Savannah, GA

After the failure of its backdating case against Gregory Reyes, former Chief Executive Officer of Brocade Communications Systems, prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Central District of California are taking a new tack in its backdating case against former KB Home CEO Bruce Karatz, according to the National Law Journal. Karatz is alleged to have received millions in undisclosed income as a result of backdating stock options, and made $232 million in his last three years as CEO alone. The prosecution has decided to focus on Karatz's personal gain from the alleged scheme, and circumvent the defense--effective in the Brocade Communications Systems case--that backdating is not criminal where the corporation is aware of it, or where a defendant relies on the advice of attorneys or accountants. Defendants have also successfully argued that backdating is a legal and legitimate practice, and that many companies restate their income as a result of such conduct.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed Reyes' conviction in August based on the government's alleged prosecutorial misconduct in intimidating and influencing witnesses. The government's failure in the Reyes case came along with its defeat in 2008 in a backdating case against Kent Roberts, the former General Counsel of McAfee, Inc., a security software firm, and the dismissal of its case against two former executives of Broadcom Corp.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On Monday, BAE Systems PLC, a United Kingdom-based, multinational defense contractor, pled guilty in the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia to charges of allegedly conspiring to defraud the United States by impairing and impeding its lawful functions, allegedly making false statements about its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) compliance program, and allegedly violating the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), according to PR Newswire. U.S. District Judge John D. Bates ordered BAE Systems to pay a $400 million criminal fine. The fine is one of the largest ever imposed in a foreign corrupt practices/export control case. BAE Systems also agreed to retain an independent compliance monitor.

BAE Systems, the prime military contractor in the UK, was alleged to have represented to various U.S. government agencies from 2000 to 2002 that it would would create and implement policies and procedures to ensure its compliance with anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), but failed to implement the policies and procedures. BAE Systems was alleged to have saved approximately $200 million in failing to implement the policies and procedures.

The government also alleged that BAE Systems made payments to shell corporations and third party intermediaries which were not subject to the scrutiny required by the U.S. government. BAE Systems is alleged to have retained "marketing advisors" to secure defense contracts and to have allegedly concealed its relationship with these advisors from the U.S. government and made undisclosed payments to them, encouraging them to set up offshore shell corporations to receive payments. The company is alleged to have created one company in the British Virgin Islands in order to allegedly conceal its marketing advisor relationships, the identities of the advisors and how much they were paid; to help the advisors avoid tax liability, and  to obstruct investigating authorities and circumvent laws of countries which prohibit such relationships. BAE Systems is alleged to have made more than £135 million in payments through the shell entity.

BAE Systems was also alleged to have given benefits to an official of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in order to influence sales of fighter jets and other armaments to the country without properly reviewing or verifying the benefits pursuant to U.S. law. BAE Systems is alleged to have transferred millions through a bank account in Switzerland controlled by an intermediary in relation to the deal.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

According to Lyle Denniston at SCOTUSblog,  Ashby Jones at the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, and Professor Ellen S. Podgor of Stetson University College of Law and the White Collar Crime Prof Blog, the U.S. Supreme Court seemed more interested in the jury selection/fair trial issues in yesterday's oral arguments in the case of former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling, Skilling v. U.S., Case No. 08-1394 then it did in the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 1346, the federal honest services fraud statute. The transcript of the oral argument may be read here. After lengthy questioning regarding the jury selection at Skilling's trial by Justice Stephen G. Breyer and others, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., raised the question of honest services. Skilling's counsel, Sri Srinivasan, appeared to have adopted the strategy of arguing for a new trial based upon juror bias relating to the Enron scandal rather than a reversal of Skilling's convictions for honest services fraud. Srinivasan argued that the Department of Justice was interpreting the law broadly enough to reach virtually any falsehood told by an employee.

Deputy Solicitor General Michael R. Dreeben argued for the government. Dreeben argued ways in which the Court could interpret the honest services fraud statute in order to avoid holding it unconstitutionally vague. Justice Anthony Kennedy stated to Dreeben that it was Congress' job to rewrite the statute and Justice Antonin Scalia remarked on the excessive scope of the statute.

The Court's decision in the case is expected this spring or summer. The parties' arguments regarding honest services fraud largely mirrored the arguments in the two other challenges to 1346 which the Court had heard this term. Commentators have opined that 1346 may not survive without being sent to Congress for reshaping.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As noted by Ashby Jones at the Wall Street Journal Law Blog, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case of U.S. v. Skilling on Monday at 1 p.m., Eastern Time. The central issue to be argued to the Court is whether the federal honest services fraud statute, 18 United States Code 1346, is "unconstitutionally vague." Mr. Jones rounds up commentary from around the blogosphere on the case.

As noted by Mr. Jones, the honest services fraud statute, Section 846, criminalizes the deprivation of another of the "intangible right to honest services." Congress enacted Section 846 22 years ago following the Supreme Court's decision in McNally v. U.S, which had ended prosecution for honest services as a part of mail or wire fraud. The problem is that Section 846 does not define "honest services." The honest services provision is a favorite of prosecutors, especially in cases where deprivation of money or property, as required in traditional mail or wire fraud cases, may be difficult to establish.

Jeff Skilling is the former Chief Executive Officer of Enron Corporation, which crashed into sudden bankruptcy in 2001. Skilling, former CEO Kenneth Lay and others were charged with conspiracy, wire fraud, making false statements to auditors and insider trading. In May of 2006, Skilling was tried in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas and the jury found him guilty on 19 counts. The District Court sentenced him to 292 months imprisonment and ordered him to pay $45 million in restitution.

Skilling appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, arguing that the government used an invalid theory of "honest services" fraud to convict him. The indictment alleged that Skilling conspired with others to, among other things, deprive Enron and its shareholders of the right to the honest services owed by its employees. The Fifth Circuit affirmed Skilling's honest services fraud conviction, noting that it had created an exception to the honest services fraud statute in the related Enron case of U.S. v. Brown, 459 F.3d 509 (5th Cir.2006) where an employer creates a goal, aligns employees' interests to achieve the goal and higher-level management sanction improper conduct to reach the goal. However, the Fifth Circuit held that Skilling's conduct had not been sanctioned by the corporation.

Skilling has appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that lower rulings on the honest services fraud statute have been “a hodgepodge of oft-conflicting holdings, statements, and dicta” that “only the most discriminating lawyer or judge” could understand. Attorney Sri Srinivasan of O’Melveny & Myers will argue on Skilling's behalf before the Court.

Another case calling into question the constitutionality of Section 1346 is the case of newspaper magnate Conrad Black. The Court heard oral arguments in Black's case last December.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Gillen Withers & Lake LLC has launched a new website at http://twitherslaw.com/. The site lists many of the notable successes which the firm has had in its history. We would like to thank our readers and encourage them to take a look at the new site.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In another sign that nothing is sacred and no area safe from crime, even the adult undergarment industry has now been marred by fraud. Benjamin Essien, 34, owner and operator of Logic World Medical, a Houston-based durable medical equipment (DME) company, pled guilty to conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud, five counts of healthcare fraud and two counts of aggravated identity theft in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, according to a press release by the FBI. Essein was charged with a scheme which began in 2004 of using names, addresses and account numbers of Medicaid beneficiaries to file false claims for adult urinary incontinence supplies many of which were never delivered to the beneficiaries, some of which were never purchased from suppliers, and which were not needed or were never prescribed by a physician. Essein continued to bill Medicaid for the supplies--which included adult diapers, underpads, wipes, and pull-up briefs--even after his delivery contractors were informed by the beneficiaries that they did not need or want the supplies. Essien billed Medicaid for the maximum amount allowable for supplies each month per beneficiary including extra large size diaper briefs, which apparently have the highest Medicaid reimbursement rate, regardless of the actual size needed by the beneficiary. it is alleged that Essein received payments from Medicaid for claims totaling approximately $1,101,865.37. he will be sentenced in May.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As reported in the South Florida Business Journal, Lewis B. Freeman, one of the best-known forensic accountants in South Florida was indicted yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on charges of conspiracy to commit mail fraud. Freeman is alleged to have misappropriated funds from fiduciary accounts from 2000 through 2009 by writing checks to himself and his firm, Lewis B. Freeman & Partners, and depositing the funds into the firm's operating account. Freeman is alleged to have misappropriated some $6 million in funds by writing approximately 162 unauthorized checks and using the proceeds to support a lavish lifestyle.

Freeman put his firm into receivership last fall during the federal criminal investigation. The firm previously did millions of dollars in business. The government alleges that out of the $6 million misappropriated, some $2.6 million of clients' monies were lost. Freeman, oddly, worked routinely as an expert for the court in liquidating the assets of companies. According to Freeman's counsel, he turned himself in and is cooperating with authorities. His counsel have stated that he made "serious mistakes," and will "accept the consequences for his actions.” 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

Frederick Scott Salyer, 54, former owner of  California-based SK Foods, which grows, processes and distributes tomatoes, was indicted on Friday on charges of racketeering, wire fraud, mail fraud, money laundering and obstruction of justice. Tomatoes from SK Foods are widely used in tomato-based products including sauces, ketchups and juices.

Salyer is alleged to have manipulated the industry through price fixing, bribery and mislabeling. Specifically, he is alleged to have bribed purchasing managers at food companies to guarantee that the companies purchased SK Foods' products over its competitors and for its competitors' pricing information. Salyer is also alleged to have ordered the mislabeling of products  As a result, consumers received dated and moldy products, and products mislabeled as organic at higher prices. In some cases, products as much as three years old with a shelf life of one year, or containing mold levels beyond limits set by the Food and Drug Administration, were alleged to have been placed on the market.

Salyer was arrested earlier this month at John F. Kennedy Airport in New York upon arriving on a flight from Switzerland. He had allegedly fled the U.S. last fall to relocate to a country where he could not be extradited after some of his subordinates pled guilty to charges in relation to the investigation, a joint effort by the FBI, IRS, FDA and Department of Justice Anti-trust Divison, nicknamed Operation Rotten Tomatoes. Salyer is alleged to have arranged for the transfer of millions of dollars to overseas accounts, and to have placed a $7 million home in Pebble Beach on the market. Salyer was denied bail.

SK Foods declared bankruptcy last May and has been acquired by another company.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

As observed by Law.com, a French court has convicted a dozen French wine traders, vintners and wine cooperatives of passing off local wines as expensive Pinot Noir for importation to the United States. The leader of the scheme, M. Claude Courset of the Ducasse wine trading company received a suspended six month prison sentence and was fined 45,000 Euros, and Sieur d'Argues, the company which sold Ducasse wines to the U.S. was fined 180,000 Euros. The defendants were charged in a court in Carcassonne, in Southwest France, with "fraud in the quality and composition of the wine"--no doubt a crime the French take very seriously. The vintners and wine cooperatives were from the Aude and Herault, in the Languedoc-Rousillon. They passed Merlot and Syrah grapes off as Pinot Noir.

M. Courset was unrepentent, however, stating that his wines were irreproachable and stating that he had reserved the right to appeal. U.S. wine conglomerate E.&J. Gallo has issued a statement stating that it is no longer selling the wines. It is unclear how many U.S. consumers noticed a difference.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks