California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

People v. Guiamelon, B232188

In a prosecution of a physician under Business and Professions Code section 650 for paying illegal fees to persons who referred patients qualified for federal and state programs to her practice, the conviction is affirmed, where: 1) conflict preemption is not applicable because the federal anti-kickback statute supplements rather than supplants the remedy under section 650; 2) obstacle preemption is not established because the purpose of section 650 is consistent with the purpose underlying the federal anti-kickback statute; 3) the court would not construe section 650 to add a scienter requirement not included in the statute as enacted; 4) section 650 is not unconstitutionally vague; and 5) section 650 does not regulate activity protected by the First Amendment.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 04/24/2012
  • Published 04/24/2012


  • Epstein


  • California Court of Appeal


  • For Appellant:
  • Hooper Lundy & Bookman, Mary Sanchez

Copied to clipboard