United States Sixth Circuit

In a criminal case arising from a complex scheme to defraud Medicare by violating the Medicare "related party" rule, defendants' convictions are affirmed over claims of error regarding: 1) the sufficiency of the evidence; and 2) the government's witness testimony. However, denial of defendants' motion for new trial is vacated and remanded where the district court abused its discretion in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on a Brady claim to more carefully consider the nature of certain documents and the information contained therein. One defendant's sentence is vacated and remanded where the district court erred in failing to explain its factual determination concerning the amount of loss and erred in calculating the amount of loss, and abused its discretion in determining the amount of restitution.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/11/2007
• Published 06/11/2007

Judges

• Before:  NORRIS, COLE, and CLAY, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Jon A. Van Steenis, Daigle, Fisse & Kessenich, Madisonville, Louisiana, Amy B. Cleary, Federal Public Defender's Office, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellants.  James C. Lynch, Assistant United States Attorney, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  Jon A. Van Steenis, Daigle, Fisse & Kessenich, Madisonville, Louisiana, Amy B. Cleary, Federal Public Defender's Office, Cleveland, Ohio, Jaime P. Serrat, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellants.  James C. Lynch, Assistant United States Attorney, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.