GlaxoSmithKline PLC said it will pay the U.S. government $3 billion to settle several long-running criminal and civil investigations into the company, including allegations that Glaxo marketed some drugs illegally and defrauded the Medicaid program. http://on.wsj.com/sAal3L
Archive for the ‘Fraud’ Category
On April 13, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an “honest services” fraud conviction where the government also argued and submitted an alternative theory that the defendant had deprived the victims of “money and property.” In U.S. v. Pelisamen the defendant was accused, along with his former lawyer, of removing funds from his grandmother’s estate, of which he was the administrator. The government charged both Pelisamen and the former lawyer with, among other things, wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343. The indictment specified that such wire fraud was for the purposes of “obtaining money and property.” The indictment did not mention 18 U.S.C. § 1346, which provides that the behavior punishable under § 1343 includes a scheme or artifice “to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services” (at issue in Skilling). The district judge however instructed the jury that it could convict Pelisamen if it found that he had either (1) “defrauded the heirs of the Estate of Rita Kaipat,” or (2) “deprived the heirs . . . of their right to honest services,” or (3) done both.
Because Pelisamen did not object to the jury instruction (Skillingwas decided after the trial), the Court engaged in a plain error analysis. The panel concluded that because there were no bribes or kickbacks alleged, the incorporation of honest-services fraud into the jury instructions and jury verdict form was plainly erroneous under Skilling. However, the Court held that Pelisman was not prejudiced by the error because the jury had convicted on both of the government’s alternative theories. Therefore, the conviction was based on a valid “money or property” theory of wire fraud.
A Northern District of Illinois federal jury, after fourteen days of deliberations, reached a decision on only one of twenty four counts brought against former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. The jury found Blagojevich guilty of count 24 which alleged that Blagojevich violated 18 U.S.C. §1001(a)(2) by telling the FBI on March 16, 2005 that: (i) he tried to maintain a firewall between politics and government; and (ii) he did not track, or want to know, who contributed to him or how much they were contributing to him. (more…)
On Tuesday, June 29, 2010 the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the government corruption convictions against former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman and ex-HealthSouth CEO Richard Scrushy. The Court ordered the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to review the matters in light of the ruling in Skilling v. United States, 561 US ___ (2010), the case of former Enron chief Jeffrey Skilling.
In the Skilling case (reported in our blog), the Supreme Court interpreted the honest services fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1346, which prohibits “a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.” The Supreme Court limited the scope of the honest services fraud statute so that it covers only bribes and kickback schemes. In other words, the Supreme Court limited the scope of prosecutions under the honest service fraud statute to those cases where prosecutors put forward evidence that defendants accepted bribes or kickbacks. (more…)
In a major ruling, the United States Supreme Court, at least partially, eliminated a critical tool for white collar prosecutors: the ability to bring charges for “honest services fraud” pursuant to 18 USC §1346, based on the undisclosed self-dealing by a public official or private employee.
The United States Supreme Court vacated one of the convictions of former Enron executive Jeffrey Skilling for so-called “honest services fraud” (18 USC §1346). Skilling v. United States, all nine Justices agreed that the “honest services” conviction should be reversed, but for different reasons.