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

Matthew Paul Brown, of Nashville, Tennessee, was indicted late last week in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for allegedly persuading Atlanta area physicians to submit claims to Medicare, Medicaid and private insurers, according to an article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Brown, who is not licensed as a physician in Georgia, is alleged to have impersonated a doctor and to have purportedly treated patients between November of 2009 and April 2011. Brown allegedly agreed to pay the doctors from 50 to 85 percent of his reimbursements from Federal healthcare programs and private insurers. A total of $1.2 million in claims were billed.

The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia stated that investigators are contacting patients whom Brown allegedly treated. He is also charged with disclosing patient information under false pretenses. The identities of the physicians whom Brown allegedly conspired with were not reported.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On Tuesday, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama in Tuscaloosa found construction contractor Roger Taylor not guilty on one count of conspiracy, five counts of bribery and two counts of obstructing justice, according to Tuscaloosa News. Mr. Taylor was one of numerous individuals investigated in relation to Alabama's Community College System. Mr. Taylor, co-owner of Hall-Taylor Construction, and was alleged to have bribed former two-year college Chancellor Roy Johnson by paying for more than $92,000 in construction costs and appliances at Johnson’s home in Opelika, Alabama, in exchange for awards of construction management work within the system. The government alleged that Mr. Taylor  was awarded $4 million in no-bid state contracts from 2002 to 2006 in exchange for the alleged bribes.

Mr. Taylor's trial began on October 25. He  was originally charged with 17 counts, but the majority of these were dropped after a successful appeal by a co-defendant. At trial, however, the prosecution failed to present any testimony showing that Johnson alleged directed or threatened college presidents to hire Hall Taylor on contracts for a massive makeover of the college system. On the contrary, witnesses testified that another construction management firm received a fair share of the contracts. The witnesses at the trial also praised Hall-Taylor's work. Mr. Taylor's counsel made the trial into a referendum on Johnson's credibility. Johnson pled guilty to 14 charges of conspiracy, bribery, witness tampering and money laundering in January of 2008. He is scheduled to be sentenced on November 18.

17 individuals, including former state legislators, college presidents and the system chancellor, have either pled guilty or been found guilty by a jury as a result of the investigation. A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Alabama issued a statement that the prosecution believed it had presented sufficient evidence to find Mr. Taylor guilty of the bribery and obstruction charges, but that it respected the jury's verdict. The government has a companion civil forfeiture case against Hall-Taylor's assets. Mr. Taylor's counsel stated that the prosecution intimidated and threatened witnesses at the grand jury investigating Johnson, and have indicated that Mr. Taylor may seek recourse for the prosecution's actions.

In other positive Federal criminal news, Bill Belt, the former Sheriff of  Avoyelles Parish, Louisiana, his wife, Tracy Belt, and his sister, Julie Bernard, were found not guilty of conspiracy, mail fraud and obstruction of justice last week by a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana after a trial which also began on October 25, according to Towntalk.com.

In 1988, Sheriff Belt allegedly contracted with Michael and Rae Johnson to install pay  telephones  for prisoners in Avoyelles Parish in a venture called Cajun Callers. Under the agreement, Cajun Callers would pay a monthly commission to the Sheriff's Office. The Johnsons made large amounts of money  from the venture, which they failed to pay taxes on. Johnson subsequently became a Louisiana  State Judge, but  was removed from the bench due to ethical violations relating to Cajun Callers. The government alleged that Sheriff Belt was paid kickbacks.

In 1990, Sheriff Belt's future wife began keeping the books for two companies She owned: Southern Louisiana Communications, which operated public pay phones; and Central Louisiana Communications, which operated phones in Louisiana parish jails.

Rae Johnson testified at trial that Tracy Belt would allegedly take money collected from the pay phones and deposit it and then write three checks in identical amounts--one of which was to her husband's tax account from which taxes were never paid. Johnson stated that she would allegedly cash one of the other checks and deliver the money to Mrs. Belt. Sheriff Belt's counsel undermined Johnson's account of the triple-check scheme on cross-examination, however. Counsel argued in closing that Johnson was a liar who escaped prosecution herself by making up stories about the Belts. The government also presented the testimony of a convicted male pedophile who installed the Cajun Callers phones in the jails, and another convicted felon who served time for crimes including insurance fraud.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

UK citizens Lincoln Julian Fraser and Jared Bentley Brook, former executives with the Imperial Consolidated Group (ICG) were acquitted today at the Old Bailey at the conclusion of a nearly nine month trial, according to the Guardian and the Telegraph. The jury acquitted Mr. Fraser and Mr. Brook of one count of conspiracy to defraud, and deadlocked over another conspiracy charge and a fraudulent trading charge. 

The fraud charged against Mr. Fraser, Mr. Brook, ICG (headquartered on a Royal Air Force base in Lincolnshire, England, with offices in Europe, Australia and the Caribbean) and others, involved offshore investments in South American mining operations and havens such as the British Virgin Islands and Greneda, in what has been alleged to be Britain's largest Ponzi scheme. From 1998 through 2002, approximately 3,000 investors around the world invested nearly £253 with ICG on the promise of high-yield returns of up to 36 percent and "total asset protection." The loss to investors is alleged to be £150 million. One investor alone, Yuichi Yoshida of Japan, invested £16.7 million. The defendants were also alleged to have provided false information to investors, including falsely inflating the alleged value of mining interests in South America, and publishing false or misleading performance figures in the Financial Times. The defendants allegedly used investment monies to cover overhead and expenses, and for investments in failed mining interests in Argentina.

ICG's business declined precipitously when a Spanish newspaper article allegedly linked ICG to Osama bin Laden in 2001. The company failed in 2002.

The British Department of Trade and Industry disqualified Mr. Fraser and Mr. Brook from acting as directors of ICG for alleged unfit conduct relating to a failed hotel business in Morecambe, Lancashire, England. 

The Crown has attempted to prosecute Mr. Fraser and Mr. Brook three times over eight years. The first trial of Mr. Fraser and Mr. Brook two years ago ended in stalemate, forcing the judge to discharge the jury. The second trial was abandoned by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) as a result of legal errors. The SFO has seven days in which to choose to seek a retrial, but has announced that it will cease its efforts to prosecute Mr. Fraser and Mr. Brook, the investigation and prosecution of whom has cost British taxpayers approximately £10 to £20 million.

A co-defendant, Bill Godley, pled guilty to a charge of conspiracy to defraud in 2007. Godley claimed to have posed as a dynamic entrepreneur and to have transformed ICG into an international business empire. Godley is expected to receive approximately three years in gaol.

Mr. Fraser's and Mr. Brook's former solicitor, Michael John Harvey, was struck off by the British Law Society in a disciplinary proceeding for alleged involvement in Mr. Fraser's and Mr. Brook's dealings.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Eddie Ray Kahn, Stephen C. Hunter, Danny True and Allan J. Tanguay, who operated American Rights Litigators/Guiding Light of God Ministries (ARL), were about making money. Specifically--making over $1 billion in false bills of exchange which purported to be drawn on the U.S. Treasury. A jury in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia convicted Florida residents Kahn, Hunter, True and Tanguay of conspiracy to defraud the United States and to commit mail fraud yesterday following an 18-day trial, according to a Department of Justice press release. Khan, the head of ARL, had previously gained notoriety for giving false tax advice to actor Wesley Snipes, who was found guilty of failure to file tax returns in February of 2008.

The government alleged that, from 1996 through 2004, the defendants, through ARL, enrolled more than 4,000 customers nationwide in tax defiance schemes based on deliberate misrepresentations of the legal foundation of the tax system. The defendants were alleged to have manufactured and sold more than 1,000 phony bills of exchange which were sent to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration in Washington for payment of taxes. The defendants also allegedly continued to submit false and obstructionist correspondence to the Internal Revenue Service even after a preliminary injunction was entered in December of 2003 directing the defendants to stop engaging in their schemes.

Image courtesy of www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22955757/

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

So whatever happened to indicted billionaire Sir Robert Allen Stanford? Well, not much, as reported by the Houston Chronicle. Stanford, who is charged with allegedly defrauding investors of more than $7 billion, is still incarcerated, despite his extensive efforts to secure release prior to his trial since his arrest in June of last year. Stanford has submitted a report from a physician to U.S. District Judge David Hittner of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, in which the physician opines that Stanford is close to “a complete nervous breakdown.” Two psychiatrists have diagnosed Stanford with severe depression as a result of his confinement.

Stanford's counsel complained to the court that Stanford needed to have frequent communication with his defense team in order to review the more than 7 million documents in the case and answer questions by his counsel. Unmoved, Judge Hittner denied Stanford's latest motion for release in an order issued two days before Christmas, and Stanford has appealed the denial.

Stanford's trial is still a year away, scheduled to begin in January 2011. He has denied the government's charges, as well as civil fraud charges brought by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Also reported in the Chronicle, similar to confessed attorney/Ponzi schemer, Scott Rothstein, Stanford allegedly had many ties to politicians. The Department of Justice is investigating approximately $2.3 million dollars in alleged contributions from Stanford and his staff to politicians over the past decade, as well as $5 million paid to lobbyists.  Donations by Stanford and his staff included $40,000 to the Senate Republican Campaign Committee, $100,000 to the inaugural committee of George W. Bush and $500,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. He furthermore set up his own lobbying firm in Washington, D.C. Stanford is alleged to have successfully lobbied to defeat legislation in Congress relating to financial secrecy and offshore banking which would have allegedly revealed his activities.

Stanford allegedly treated politicians to trips to the Carribean, hosting dinners with lobster and caviar. Illustrative of Stanford's high level government contacts was the fact that, mere hours after Stanford was arrested last year, Representative Pete Sessions of Texas, Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, sent Stanford an e-mail stating that he "loved" Stanford and believed in him, and offering his advice or to listen to Stanford. Stanford and his staff contributed $44,375 to Sessions. Stanford entertained numerous Congressional delegations to the Carribean nation of Antigua, where Stanford was based, at a total cost of $311,307. Stanford also hosted a wedding dinner for New York Representative John Sweeney at a five-star restaurant owned by Stanford in Antigua, and held a cocktail fundraiser for Ohio Representative Bob Ney in Miami. Ney was later sentenced to 30 months imprisonment for accepting money and gifts from convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Stanford opened a trust office in Miami in 2001, which allegedly enabled his bank to sell millions in certificates of deposit. This event allegedly prompted him to become involved in politics in order to prevent legislation which would have forced Stanford to reveal the source of the flow of monies to the office.

19 politicians have returned a total of $87,800 in contributions from Stanford to the court-appointed receiver. Other politicians have stated that they have donated money contributed by Stanford to charity, including $45,000 by Senator Bill Nelson of Florida, and $11,800 by Representative Charlie Rangel.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Leading the Georgia news today is the nomination of Assistant United States Attorney Sally Quillian Yates by President Barack Obama to be the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia. The President announced Mrs. Yates' nomination in a Christmas Eve press release.

Mrs. Yates has served as the interim head of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Georgia since August, when the former U.S. Attorney, David E. Nahmias, stepped down to become Chief Justice of the Georgia Supreme Court. She has had a distinguished career as a federal prosecutor since joining the U.S. Attorney's Office in 1989. Mrs. Yates became the Chief of the U.S. Attorney's Office's fraud and public corruption unit in 1994, and became a top aide to the U.S. Attorney in 2002. Prior to joining the U.S. Attorney's Office, Mrs. Yates, a double graduate of the University of Georgia, was in private practice with King & Spalding. Notably, Mrs. Yates successfully prosecuted former Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell and former Georgia State Schools Superintendant Linda Schrenko for corruption, and was an integral part of the investigation into the 1996 Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta. Mrs. Yates is married to J. Comer Yates, an attorney and Executive Director for the Atlanta Speech School, which has served children with speech, hearing, language or learning disabilities since 1938.

Mrs. Yates' nomination has been widely praised, including by the criminal defense bar. The nomination must be approved by the United States Senate. If confirmed, Mrs. Yates will be the first female U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia. Georgia was one of the 13 original federal districts created by the Judiciary Act of 1789, and was subdivided into the Northern and Southern Districts in 1848, and further subdivided again to include the Middle District in 1926. The Act provided that "there shall be appointed in each district a meet person learned in the law to act as attorney for the United States in such district, who shall be sworn or affirmed to the faithful execution of his office, whose duty it shall be to prosecute in such district all delinquents for crimes and offences, cognizable under the authority of the United States, and all civil actions in which the United States shall be concerned, except before the supreme court in the district in which that court shall be holden." Judiciary Act of 1789, Sec. 35. There are currently 93 U.S. Attorneys in a corresponding number of districts across the nation. The Federal Criminal Defense Blog congratulates Mrs. Yates on her nomination and expected confirmation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

We at FCDB read H.R.3200, “America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009,” earlier this year (well okay, perhaps we didn’t “read” it all, maybe skimmed is a better description) and were surprised to find that it appeared to add nothing to our nation’s ever-growing corpus of criminal provisions. Well, yesterday, Montana Senator Max Baucus released the long-awaited America’s Healthy Future Act, better known as the “Baucus Bill,” the text of which can be read here, which does contain an alteration of note to existing criminal law . We’ll leave it to others to outline all the proposed changes to the nation’s healthcare industry.
 

The most notable change by the Baucus Bill is amends the Medicare Anti-Kickback statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7b(b), which makes it illegal to “knowingly and willfully” solicit or receive any remuneration for referring an individual to a person for the purpose of furnishing any item or service for which payment may be made in whole or in part under a Federal health care program; or in return for purchasing, leasing or ordering any good, facility, service, or item for which payment may be made in whole or in part under a Federal health care program; or to “knowingly and willfully” refer an individual to a person for the furnishing any item or service for which payment may be made in whole or in part under a Federal health care program; or purchase, lease or order any good, facility, service, or item for which payment may be made in whole or in part under a Federal health care program. The Bill proposes to “amend the Anti-kickback statute to add language defining “willfully” as “a person acted voluntarily and purposefully to do what the law forbids and the person need not have actual knowledge of the law or specific intent to violate that law.” The Bill does not give the reason for the change, but it is undoubtedly to foreclose some defense or close some loophole which has arisen in practice or actual cases.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link