Home 5 Articles 5 Federal Court Upholds $46.7 Million Medicare PHPs Fraud Conviction

Federal Court Upholds $46.7 Million Medicare PHPs Fraud Conviction

by | Oct 29, 2021 | Articles, Essential, Lab Compliance Advisor, Labs in Court-lca

Case: In 2015, the former president of a Texas hospital was ordered to pay restitution of $46,753,180 and spend 45 years in prison after being found guilty of 10 counts for his role in a $158 million Medicare Partial Hospitalization Programs (PHPs) fraud scheme. Now age 76, the president made a bid to get the convictions set aside but the Texas federal court said no dice and let the convictions stand. Significance: The laundry list of defenses that the court rejected included, among others: Defense counsel was ineffective because it didn’t research federal law on PHPs or object to certain evidence; The evidence supporting his convictions was insufficient; The prosecution’s evidence gathering wasn’t an illegal search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment; He wasn’t denied his Fifth Amendment due process rights; The prosecution’s failure to call a certain witness didn’t deny him of his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him; and The government didn’t commit entrapment. United States v. Gibson, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179712

Case: In 2015, the former president of a Texas hospital was ordered to pay restitution of $46,753,180 and spend 45 years in prison after being found guilty of 10 counts for his role in a $158 million Medicare Partial Hospitalization Programs (PHPs) fraud scheme. Now age 76, the president made a bid to get the convictions set aside but the Texas federal court said no dice and let the convictions stand.

Significance: The laundry list of defenses that the court rejected included, among others:

  • Defense counsel was ineffective because it didn’t research federal law on PHPs or object to certain evidence;
  • The evidence supporting his convictions was insufficient;
  • The prosecution’s evidence gathering wasn’t an illegal search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment;
  • He wasn’t denied his Fifth Amendment due process rights;
  • The prosecution’s failure to call a certain witness didn’t deny him of his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him; and
  • The government didn’t commit entrapment.

United States v. Gibson, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179712

Subscribe to view Essential

Start a Free Trial for immediate access to this article