Federal Crimes

Federal Government Escalating Medicare Fraud Investigations and Prosecutions

Published on: October 15, 2011 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Over the last several years with the ever-increasing deficit becoming more and more of a issue in the media, the federal and state governments have focused more on crimes that involve fraud, including fraud that involves government benefits. There may be no bigger crime involving fraud and government benefits at any time in our history than Medicare fraud.

Medicare is a government funded insurance program that assists approximately 46 million of the elderly and disabled with health care. One report estimated the total amount of Medicare fraud at $60 billion as of 2009. We have seen many cases where state and/or federal law enforcement officials have investigated and arrested doctors, medical center owners, executives and employees and patients for allegedly committing various versions of Medicare fraud. One of the most common methods of committing Medicare fraud occurs when a doctor or other employee sends a Medicare reimbursement form to the government for medical services or equipment that were unnecessary or never provided.

Recently the federal government announced that 91 people in eight different cities were charged with committing Medicare fraud in an amount totaling approximately $300 million. Among those charged were many doctors accused of seeking reimbursement for medical services that were never provided. As an example, one doctor is accused of billing Medicare for medical services allegedly provided to dead people.

Federal Judge Decides Ecstasy Penalties Are Too Harsh Under Federal Sentencing Guidelines

Published on: July 31, 2011 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

A federal judge recently declined to sentence a defendant with ecstasy charges within the federal sentencing guidelines because he felt the federal sentencing guidelines punish ecstasy crimes too harshly and are not scientifically justified.

In federal court, when a defendant pleads guilty or is convicted at trial, the judge will determine his/her sentencing guidelines prior to sentencing. The ultimate guideline range takes several factors into consideration including, for drug cases, the type of drug and the quantity of the drug. Crimes involving some drugs result in higher sentencing ranges than others. A person’s criminal history and the circumstances of the crime are also factors in determining one’s sentencing guidelines range. Ultimately, a guideline range for the crime that is measured in months will be established which suggests that the judge should sentence the defendant somewhere within that range. Federal judges are not required to sentence the defendant within that range; they can depart above or below that range based on the nature of the criminal activity and the particular defendant and other factors.

In this case, the defendant pled guilty to conspiracy to possess and distribute ecstasy. His sentencing guidelines range was 63 – 78 months in federal prison. The judge, however, departed well below that guidelines range and sentenced the defendant to 26 months in prison. At the sentencing hearing, the judge was presented with testimony about the relative safety of ecstasy, including testimony from a Harvard psychiatrist who referenced a five year study that found long term recreational ecstasy use did not cause clinically significant damaging effects. The judge concluded that the harshness of the ecstasy sentencing guidelines did not have a rational relationship to the effects of the drug and a sentence within the guidelines range would be greater than necessary to achieve the objectives of sentencing.

Federal Prisoners Can Request a Reduced Sentences on Crack Cocaine Charges

Published on: July 16, 2011 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In the past, we have discussed the unequal treatment given to defendants who have been arrested for drug crimes where the primary difference was whether the illegal drug was crack cocaine or powder cocaine. Under the old federal criminal laws, people arrested and charged with crack cocaine crimes faced much stiffer penalties and prison sentences than those charged with similar powder cocaine charges. As an example, someone caught with 5 grams of crack cocaine could face a mandatory minimum prison sentence of five years while it would take 500 grams of powder cocaine to subject a defendant to the same mandatory minimum prison sentence.

Under the Fair Sentencing Act, Congress acted to bridge the gap between sentences for crack cocaine crimes and powder cocaine crimes. While the two crimes are still not considered equal for sentencing purposes, the large disparity between crack cocaine and powder cocaine crime sentences has diminished to some degree. The disparity was reduced from 100-1 to 18-1.

One question that remained when Congress decided to bring sentences for crack cocaine and powder cocaine crimes closer together was whether defendants convicted of crack cocaine crimes sentenced under the old, harsher laws could petition the courts for a modified, lesser sentence considering the new law. There are thousands of federal inmates who have been convicted of crack cocaine crimes that would have greatly benefited had Congress decided to fix this disparity sooner.

Twenty-One People Indicted on Federal Drug Charges in Brunswick, Georgia

Published on: April 1, 2011 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Twenty-one people were charged with conspiracy to distribute cocaine and marijuana in Brunswick, Georgia federal court, according to an article on News4Jax.com. A few of them were also indicted on related weapons charges. The indictments were the result of a lengthy investigation by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA), the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI), the Glyn Brunswick Narcotics Enforcement team and the FBI. According to the article, each of the twenty-one defendants faces a minimum 10 year prison sentence and up to life in prison along with significant fines and forfeiture of their property.

Drug cases such as these are not uncommon in federal court. Many drug conspiracy cases involve multiple defendants because of the way the crime is charged. We see conspiracy charged in federal court quite often in drug cases because it can be an easier charge to prove. In order to prove conspiracy to distribute or manufacture illegal drugs, the federal prosecutors do not have to prove that each defendant actually sold the drugs, was involved in manufacturing the drugs (in methamphetamine cases) or actually grew the drugs (in marijuana cases). The federal government merely has to prove that the particular defendant knowingly and intentionally agreed or worked with at least one other defendant to distribute, manufacture or grow the drugs. Depending on the case, this can be a lot easier to prove than proving actual drug selling, drug manufacturing or drug growing on the part of each person charged. A conspiracy to commit a federal drug crime can involve significantly more conduct than just selling, manufacturing or growing, and the conspiracy charge can cover a lot of different people that had some known relationship to the operation, even when that person’s relationship to the operation is minor.

While the evidence that is needed to prove a conspiracy can be less than what is required to prove an actual hands-on drug charge, the penalties are often the same. As the article indicates, the conspiracy charge can come with severe penalties just like drug selling, manufacturing and growing charges. As a result, a person who was only tangentially involved (i.e. just handled the money or provided some of the materials used to set up the operation) can face a 10 year minimum prison sentence just like the person who actually sold the drugs.

Federal Criminal Sentencing Guidelines for Crack Cocaine Cases Now in Effect

Published on: November 26, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

As criminal defense lawyers in the Jacksonville, Florida area who handle all criminal cases in state and federal courts, we have seen how people convicted of crack cocaine crimes can receive much higher sentences than those convicted of powder cocaine crimes where the amount of powder cocaine was similar to or even less than the crack cocaine in the related case. The unfairness of these sentencing rules, which disproportionately punished people involved with crack cocaine over those involved with powder cocaine, has been discussed by prosecutors, criminal defense lawyers, federal judges and even the Congress and the president.

Finally, new rules bringing sentences for crack cocaine cases and powder cocaine cases closer together have been enacted. The Fair Sentencing Act, which will permanently become the law next year, is now in effect.

The old federal sentencing guidelines would provide that a person caught with as few as 5 grams of crack cocaine would receive a five year minimum mandatory prison sentence. However, it would take at least 500 grams of powder cocaine to get the same minimum mandatory sentence. That was quite a disparity. With the new law and federal sentencing rules, it will now take 28 grams of crack cocaine to trigger the five year minimum mandatory prison sentence. The threshold for the ten year minimum mandatory prison sentence has been increased from 50 grams of crack cocaine to 280 grams of crack cocaine.

Federal Authorities Charge St. Augustine Woman With Alleged $100 Million Fraud

Published on: November 24, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

The federal government recently obtained an indictment against a St. Augustine woman claiming she was running a Ponzi scheme through her investment company in St. Augustine, Florida, according to an article on News4Jax.com. The woman was charged with 14 counts of wire fraud, mail fraud and conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud in federal court in Jacksonville, Florida for allegedly stealing more than $100 million from investors. The federal government claims that the suspect told investors they were investing money in high interest loans and would be assured of a 15% – 20% return on their money. The federal government alleges that she was actually running a Ponzi scheme with the investment funds.

A Ponzi scheme involves a person soliciting funds from investors and promising that the money will be allocated into legitimate investments. The person also typically promises unrealistically high returns. Once the investments start coming in, the person will pay the prior investors with some of the new money coming in and call the payments the returns which ostensibly confirm the promise of the great investment. Ultimately, when new investors run out, there is not enough money to pay off the existing investors and the people start asking questions.

A Good Example of Overcriminalization in Federal Court

Published on: November 19, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

The term “overcriminalization” refers to the government creating laws that make certain conduct a crime when that conduct is more appropriately addressed with less serious sanctions such as a fine, or perhaps not at all. A recent article on the Miami Herald’s website discusses this overcriminalization issue and provides a very good example. In 1999, Abner Shoenwetter, a 64 year old seafood importer with no prior criminal record, was charged with smuggling and conspiracy after he agreed to buy lobsters from a supplier he had used many times in the past. Apparently, these particular lobsters were caught in violation of regulations in Honduras, even though it was later determined that the Honduras regulations did not apply to the lobsters. The alleged violations related to how the lobsters were packaged and the size of the lobsters. In any case, Mr. Shoenwetter served six years in federal prison for agreeing to buy these lobsters.

The article notes that there are more than 4,450 federal crimes in existence to go along with more than 300,000 federal regulations for which one can be punished with criminal sanctions. Between 2000 and 2007, Congress created 452 new crimes, an average of more than one per week. One problem, it seems, is that our reactive government has a natural tendency to get bigger, with new laws, but no one seems to take the time to assess the state of the old laws to eliminate those that may be unnecessary, out of date, too ambiguous or just plain wrong.

Federal prosecutors Indicted Several for Mortgage Fraud Scheme in Jacksonville, Florida

Published on: November 12, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

A federal grand jury recently indicted a group of people based on prosecutors’ allegations that they participated in a scheme to defraud mortgage brokers out of $1.8 million in thirteen different real estate transactions. The charges allegedly involve Access E-Mortgage, Inc., a company out of St. Augustine, Florida. Based on a recent article, the prosecutors are using the federal mail and wire fraud statutes to charge the individuals. The indictment charges a total of sixteen individuals allegedly involved in the scheme. According to the indictment, the scheme involved recruiting straw buyers who would give false information to the mortgage brokers to obtain loans. The loaned funds would then allegedly be stolen by the people involved in the scheme.

We have handled several recent cases involving alleged mortgage fraud over the last several months. As we discussed on our website before, the federal government has taken a greater interest in these cases and attributed more time, manpower and other resources to make mortgage fraud cases. This appears to be a reaction to the publicity the failing housing market and numerous foreclosures have had over the last couple of years. With the federal government, and the state and local government to a lesser degree, it seems like prosecutions in a particular area often follow the news of the day. As the housing market and foreclosures have become more of an issue in the media, the number of mortgage fraud cases have increased. Sometimes, this reaction to newsworthy issues can result in people being arrested and charged with crimes who have little to no involvement in the criminal activity. When the government casts a wide net, some innocent people often get caught.

Opening and Stealing the Mail is a Federal Crime

Published on: November 3, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Eight employees of the U.S. Postal Service were arrested by federal agents for opening and stealing mail, according to a recent Jacksonville news article. The postal employees were accused of opening the mail and stealing the contesnts such as gift cards, debit cards and other items of value. Because the U.S. mail comes under the jurisdiction of the Office of the Inspector General, a federal department, the suspects were all indicted for mail theft and other charges in federal court. Mail theft in federal court carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each count.

Sexting Crimes Becoming More Prevalent in Florida

Published on: September 27, 2010 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Many of the crimes we see that involve computer or networking technology and criminal activity of a sexual nature deal with people in possession of child pornography on their computers. Law enforcement officials are able to track these photos and videos and find them on just about any computer. People need to understand that connecting a computer to the internet is like opening a door to the harddrive through which the government can freely walk, with the appropriate search warrant or permission, of course.

However, another crime we are starting to see more often in Florida deals with a new term called sexting. Sexting, which is derived from the word texting, involves sending sexually suggestive, and sometimes illegal, picture via text messages, which can be done on most cell phones these days. Some kids may think that sending a naked picture to a friend of similar age is a joke. In fact, sending a sexually suggestive picture of a minor to another person over the internet or via text message can be a serious crime in Florida. Police in the Jacksonville area are receiving more complaints about such activity and following up with arrests. When a person uses a cell phone or computer to send such a picture, it can be a federal crime. One twenty-four year old kid was recently sentenced to twenty years in federal prison for violating federal criminal laws by sending naked pictures of a minor over the internet and by cell phone. Everyone should be aware, and adults should tell their kids, that it can be a very serious crime to send nude and other sexually suggestive pictures by text message or over the internet, regardless of how harmless it may seem.