United States v. Golding, No. 15-2555 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his conviction for defrauding a health-care benefits program, and of making false statements about the delivery or payment for healthcare benefits. The court concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) regarding a prior investigation about his physician assistant and a prior settlement agreement with his pharmacy. In this case, the district court did not clearly abuse its discretion in ruling that the investigation and settlement were relevant to defendant's intent and knowledge, and were not overly prejudicial. Furthermore, the district court gave a limiting instruction that the evidence could be considered only on the issue of whether defendant acted knowingly and willfully. Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the proposed testimony about other employees and defendant's patient care was irrelevant to the charged offenses. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Per Curiam - Before Smith, Gruender and Benton, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. In prosecution for health-care benefits fraud, the district court did not err in admitting evidence concerning two prior investigations by regulatory boards as the evidence was relevant to show whether defendant acted knowingly and willfully, and the court gave a proper limiting instruction; no error in excluding testimony offered by defendant as the proposed testimony was irrelevant to the charged offenses.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.