Health care fraud, also referred to as Medicare or Medicaid fraud, can take several forms. Some of the more common accusations of health care fraud involve claims that doctors are charging the government for medical services or equipment that were not necessary or doctors are charging the government for medical services or equipment that were not provided. Investigators will look for what they consider to be excessive or unusual billing practices when investigating health care fraud cases.
According to the government, approximately $60 billion in public and private health care spending is lost each year to health care fraud. As a result, the government is increasing its budget to fight what they perceive to be health care fraud. In 2010, the federal government increased the health care fraud budget from $200 million to $300 million. As expected, health care fraud cases have increased. In the six months prior to the speech and press release, 60 health care fraud cases were filed and over 200 people were charged with health care fraud related crimes.
When the government focuses on a particular issue, they will pump more money into enforcement and increase arrests and prosecutions. Often times, the wide net cast by the government to make these cases crosses the line between illegal fraud and honest mistakes and aggressive but legal business practices.
]]>For marijuana and cocaine in Florida, this is often the case. A person has to be in possession of more than 25 pounds of cannabis (marijuana) to be charged with trafficking in marijuana. It is difficult for someone to argue that more than 25 pounds of marijuana is for personal use. A person has to have 28 grams or more of cocaine to be charged with trafficking in cocaine. 28 grams does not actually appear to be a large quantity of anything, but it is certainly more than what one would consider a personal use amount.
However, for illegal pills that are obtained without the appropriate doctor's prescription, a person can have very few pills and be charged with the serious crime of trafficking. It only requires possession of 4 grams or more of pills such as Vicodin, Percocet, Oxycodone, Oxycontin and other similar pills to be charged with trafficking. While those pills actually have just a very small amount of the actual drug in them (most of those pills are comprised of other substances), it is the weight of the entire pill, not just the portion of the actual drug in the pill, that is relevant to the trafficking quantity determination. Four grams of illegal pills are not very much. If a person has a few pills without a prescription, he/she could be subject to a trafficking charge that comes with a minimum mandatory prison sentence of 3 years.
We think this part of the law is unreasonable. There are people who lawfully acquired pain pills due to injuries and other conditions who become addicted to them or otherwise need them to deal with constant pain. It does not take very many pills for that person to be considered a drug trafficker under the law. A person who brings bricks of cocaine into the state in the trunk of the case may be appropriately considered a drug trafficker. Someone who gets a few pain pills without a prescription to treat pain should not be considered a drug trafficker under Florida law.
]]>For the few people who do not know, they have police and/or sheriff officers at the jail. It is not a good place to show up drunk demanding visits with inmates. This story falls into the category of stories about people who are trying to get arrested.
DUI cases made by police officers often have holes allowing for various defenses that criminal defense lawyers can exploit when defending DUI clients. However, there are certain things DUI defendants can do to impair their defenses. This is a unique and extreme example but generally, if the police have stopped you and are investigating you for a possible DUI, the best thing to do is to stay calm, be polite and ask for your criminal defense lawyer without providing any information about where you have been, what you have been doing and your current state of mind.
]]>However, this case and the ultimate charges became much more serious when the suspect allegedly slammed the car door on the police officer and broke his arm. At that point, the case went from a fairly minor theft case to a theft and aggravated battery against a law enforcement officer case. In Florida, aggravated battery against a law enforcement officer is a first degree felony which carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison. Therefore, if the suspect had just removed the merchandise from the store without paying and the goods were worth $300 or more, he was looking at a maximum sentence of five years but realistically either probation or a short term of imprisonment. However, by slamming the door on the police officer and breaking his arm, he is now likely looking at a much more significant prison sentence if proven guilty.
]]>As criminal defense lawyers handling cases, including many drug cases, throughout Northeast Florida, we have seen similar cases where people are accused of trying to destroy, or otherwise get rid of, drugs when police come to a residence or hotel room. Many times, when the police search a home, hotel room or other location that is often occupied by multiple people, the police will find drugs somewhere on the premises, but it will not be clear who actually owned or possessed the drugs. The police will often arrest everyone at the premises, or the people closest to the drugs. However, these are often weak constructive possession of drugs cases. If the police and the State cannot prove who actually knew about and had some control over those drugs, the drug charges will not stick.
However, in cases where the police come in and they actually observe a person trying to dispose of the drugs, that is no longer a constructive possession case. If the police can prove that a person actually possessed the drugs and knew what he/she had was illegal drugs, that is an actual possession of drugs case that is often stronger than the constructive possession of drugs cases. If the police come in a home with a search warrant and see someone flushing a large quantity of crack cocaine down the toilet, that is obviously a stronger case than the one where drugs are located somewhere on the premises but not immediately near any particular person.
]]>As the article suggests, there are several reasons why we have seen more arrests for child pornography. First, state, local and federal law enforcement officials are initiating more investigations into the crime. Some crimes do not resonate with the public as much as others. For instance, not everyone can get behind spending a lot of money and resources to fight drug crimes. However, the public will always support officials who make child pornography a priority. Additionally, the technology is better today than it was in the past. This works both ways. People have more access to child pornography with computers and the internet. However, law enforcement officials have better technology to track and catch people who are viewing and sharing illegal pictures and videos.
Regardless of the reasons for the increase, when the police, FBI or other law enforcement agency make an arrest for child pornography, it is practically certain that the case will be treated very seriously by the prosecutors.
]]>We have seen several of these kinds of fraud cases along with similar cases involving fraudulent checks and ATM cards. While these types of schemes do exist, they are not always easy to prove. People on juries expect that ATM machines have surveillance cameras and checks have fingerprints. They expect to see concrete proof of who was involved. However, those important elements of proof are often missing from these investigations. Each case needs to be analyzed to see exactly what can be proven. It is one thing to prove that the bank suffered a loss but quite another to prove exactly how it happened and who was responsible. The money and customer information that are involved in these cases often pass through several hands. It is up to the police and the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt which of those people are responsible for the crime.
]]>Most people think of a major drug dealer moving large quantities of drugs when they think of drug traffickers. However, that is not necessarily the case, particularly when dealing with possession of illegal pills such as Lortab, Percocet, Vicodin, Oxycodone and Oxycontin, among others, without a prescription. It only takes a few pills to meet the requirements for a trafficking in pills charge. For other drugs like crack cocaine, powder cocaine or methamphetamine, there is a bigger difference between drug trafficking and possession. It takes 28 or more grams of cocaine to be charged with trafficking in cocaine and 14 or more grams of methamphetamine to meet the requirements for trafficking in methamphetamine. However, while those amounts are clearly more than short term personal use amounts, when you see them, they still are not the huge quantities of drugs some might expect for a trafficking charge.
With respect to trafficking in marijuana, it takes 25 pounds of marijuana to be charged with trafficking. So for marijuana at least, there is a pretty clear difference between simple possession and trafficking.
For pills, however, the difference is the most minute. It only takes a few pills to be charged with the serious charge of trafficking in pills and face the potential of significant prison time. This is scary because a lot of people may have old pills laying around or may have borrowed some for a particular injury or condition and may unwittingly have a trafficking amount of pills in their home.
In terms of what a person needs to do with the drugs to be charged with trafficking, there is no difference between possession and trafficking. All that is required to be charged with trafficking in illegal drugs is to have the drugs in one's possession. It is the amount, or weight, of the drugs which makes up the key differences depending on the particular drug.
]]>As most people know, if a person drives while under the influence of alcohol to the extent that his normal faculties (i.e. vision, judgment, coordination, balance, speech, etc) are impaired, he/she can be charged with DUI, which is a misdemeanor crime. Although a first or second DUI will always be a misdemeanor, that crime has reached the point where the penalties can be quite severe including jail, probation, community service, a large fine and a suspended license.
However, the charge of DUI can also be a felony charge in some situations and result in much more serious penalties such as significant prison time. If a person gets a third or fourth DUI, the State may have the option of charging the defendant with a third degree felony that carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison. However, the State in the Jacksonville, Florida area typically will still charge those cases as misdemeanors.
However, if a person is alleged to be intoxicated and involved in an accident that causes serious injury or death to another, that person will almost certainly be charged with a felony- either DUI with serious bodily injury or DUI manslaughter. These are very serious cases for which the State often recommends significant jail or prison time.
]]>Law enforcement authorities on the state and federal levels are focusing more and more on child pornography cases. As most people should know, it is a federal crime and a state crime to possess child pornography pictures and videos, create them, share them, distribute them or receive them. Viewing child pornography on one's computer and then deleting the file is illegal. Law enforcement officials have effective computer tracking technology which can tell them which computers may contain child pornography files. As this technology gets better and more people use the internet (which gives people better access and opportunity to view child pornography pictures and videos), state and federal law enforcement will make more and more arrests. And when these arrests are made and child pornography charges are brought, the potential penalties are very serious.
]]>When the police and the state rely on constructive possession in Florida, that is not always an automatic dismissal of the drug charges. Many of the constructive possession of drug cases are weak, however some of them have some merit to them. We recently read about a case that took place just south of Jacksonville, Florida in Daytona Beach where a person was convicted of possession of crack cocaine on a constructive possession theory.
In this case, two people were in a car that was stopped by police. The driver was arrested for driving with a suspended license, and the car was searched. The police found a bag of crack cocaine on the floorboard on the passenger side of the vehicle where the defendant had been sitting. He was charged with and convicted of possession of cocaine.
Normally, just being close to the illegal drugs is not enough for the officer to arrest a person nor for a conviction on drug charges. However, in this case, the judge determined that the drugs were located right where the defendant was sitting and within arm's reach of the defendant only. The defendant would still have arguments that he did not know the drugs were there, someone else placed them there previously or the other occupant of the vehicle threw the drugs down there when he saw the officer. There are always defenses in a constructive possession of drugs case. However, there are also times when a judge or a jury decides there is sufficient evidence to go forward on a drug case even when possession of the drugs is just constructive.
]]>The best thing to do in a situation like that is to have the criminal record sealed or expunged. However, because Florida law only allows a person to have a criminal record sealed or expunged in limited circumstances, many people are not eligible for this service. There are several rules dealing with who is or is not eligible for a sealing or expunction. However, one basic rule is that if you have ever been adjudicated guilty of a crime, you cannot get your criminal record sealed or expunged. This rule affects a lot of people and is the number one reason why a person is not eligible under Florida law to have a criminal record sealed or expunged.
It is very important for a person who has just been arrested or who has a pending criminal case to understand what happens when the case is resolved. When a person enters a plea of guilty or no contest, the judge can do one of two things. The judge can adjudicate the person guilty or withhold adjudication. Those words probably do not mean much to the average person, but they are crucial when it comes time to seal or expunge a criminal record. If the judge adjudicates a person guilty for any crime, that person may not get any crime sealed or expunged. If the judge withholds adjudication at sentencing, that person remains eligible for sealing or expunction depending on other factors.
This often comes into play on minor crimes where the defendant faces little to no punishment, enters a plea of guilty or no contest and does not consider whether the judge will adjudicate them guilty or withhold adjudication. Even where the sentence seems light or otherwise fair (i.e. no jail time, no or minimal probation and a small fine), it is important to know if the judge is going to adjudicate the person guilty or withhold adjudication.
If you have a pending case and are not sure about this procedure, feel free to contact us for a free consultation so you can retain your eligibility to later seal or expunge your record. If you have a prior case that is showing up to employers and want to get it sealed or expunged, call us for a free consultation to see if you are eligible.
]]>Additionally in Florida, a police officer conducting a DUI investigation will also ask the suspect driver to submit to a breath, blood or urine test to determine the driver's blood alcohol level. In Florida, the legal limit is 0.08. When a person in Florida accepts a driver's license and the privilege to drive, he/she impliedly consents to take the breathalyzer test, however, the request to take the breathalyzer, blood or urine test is often refused by people under investigation for DUI for various reasons. However, in some circumstances, the police can force a person to submit to a blood test.
Florida law provides that the police can compel a person to give blood for a DUI investigation to check blood alcohol content (BAC) if the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect driver was under the influence of alcohol or drugs and that driver caused an accident resulting in serious bodily injury(ies) to someone. In other words, if a person is involved in an accident that seriously injured someone and the police officer finds evidence that the driver caused the accident and was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time (i.e. odor of alcohol, slurred speech, stumbling/swaying, admitting to drinking alcohol or using drugs, taking the field sobriety test and/or other factors), the police officer can force the suspect driver to give blood to be tested for alcohol content.
On the other hand, if the police officer forces a suspect to give blood and the police officer cannot later meet those elements in court because someone else was the cause of the accident or no one was seriously injured or there was insufficient evidence that the suspect was impaired by alcohol or drugs, then the resulting drug test may be thrown out after the criminal defense lawyer files a motion to suppress evidence of the blood test.
]]>In this case, the police officer testified that he saw the suspect driving a vehicle on which the taillights were broken. The police officer tried to stop the suspect, and the suspect fled in his vehicle. The suspect was ultimately caught and arrested.
In order for the state to prove the crime of fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer in Florida, the state must establish that the defendant intentionally tries to get away from a police officer's vehicle that is properly marked with the police agency's insignia and its siren and emergency lights activated. In other words, the state has to prove that the suspect intentionally tried to flee and would have known the person chasing him/her was a police officer because the police vehicle was properly marked and lit.
In this case, the police officer testified that he had his lights and sirens on and he was driving a marked vehicle. However, the police officer did not testify that his police vehicle had the police agency's insignia on it. Because the state failed to establish this element, the case was thrown out.
The law says what it says, and if the police and the state do not prove every element of the crime, the case should get thrown out. In the case of a fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer charge in Florida, many police officers are driving unmarked vehicles or partially marked vehicles. If the state cannot prove that the person allegedly fleeing from the police officer knew or would have known he/she was fleeing from a police officer because the car was not properly marked, that charge should not hold up in court.
]]>In a recent criminal case in Florida south of Jacksonville, a defendant was charged with committing a robbery and a battery at a house in a particular neighborhood. The police obtained the defendant's historical cell site records to show that he was in the area of the robbery and battery around the time the crimes occurred. The criminal defense lawyer tried to suppress those records claiming that the police obtained those cell site records in violation of the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights. However, the court disagreed with the criminal defense attorney. Because the cell site records show only where a person has been (and not where he/she is presently), the Fourth Amendment protections do not apply.
In other words, in Florida the police can fairly easily obtain a person's historical cell site records to establish where a person with his/her cell phone was around the time of the crime by claiming that such evidence is relevant to an ongoing criminal case.
]]>