United States District Court, D. Hawaii
ORDER GRANTING GOVERNMENT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO
ADMIT EVIDENCE OF SCHEME TO DEFRAUD (ECF NO. 55) AND DENYING
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO FED.
R. EVID. 404(B) (ECF NO. 72)
GILLMOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Sheila Harris is charged in the First Superseding Indictment
with eleven counts of wire fraud, two counts of aggravated
identity theft, and four counts of making a false statement
with regards to health care.
is charged with devising a scheme and artifice to defraud and
obtain money from Tricare, a health care program of the
United States Department of Defense Military Health System.
The Government explains the scheme as follows:
The scheme began in July 2008, when Tricare dramatically
reduced the speech therapy reimbursement amounts paid to
Harris Therapy because of Harris Therapy's over billing
for services. It continued through 2012, when Tricare audited
Harris Therapy due to false billing complaints from a parent
of a minor beneficiary. The counts in the indictment relate
to 13 patient beneficiaries and 4 speech therapy providers
(known as speech language pathologists). The full scope of
the scheme involved approximately 5, 259 falsified speech
therapy sessions included in 2, 328 false claims submitted to
Tricare, and over 90 minor beneficiaries.
(Gov't Motion in Limine at pp. 3-4, ECF No. 55).
IS PERMITTED To Seek To Admit Evidence Of Scheme To
Government may seek to introduce evidence of the overall
scheme to defraud Tricare for speech therapy services from
2008 to 2012.
Government seeks to introduce evidence of the overall scheme
to defraud. The Government asserts the scheme took place from
2008 to 2012 and involved falsified billing and records for
speech therapy services made to Tricare. The Government
argues the evidence does not constitute other acts evidence
pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). The Government
states the evidence of the scheme to defraud is direct
evidence of the charged scheme, an element of the crime.
is charged in the First Superseding Indictment with eleven
counts of wire fraud. The elements of wire fraud are:
(1) the existence of a scheme to defraud;
(2) the use of wire, radio, or television to further the
(3) a specific intent to defraud.
United States v. Jinian, 725 F.3d 954, 960 (9th Cir.
the required elements for the Government to demonstrate,
beyond a reasonable doubt, is the existence of a scheme to
defraud. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals explained in
United States v. Loftis, 843 F.3d 1173, 1176-77 (9th
Cir. 2016) that in a wire fraud prosecution the Government
may introduce evidence of uncharged transactions in order to
prove the existence of a scheme to defraud. The appellate
court explained that the commission of wire fraud necessarily
includes a fraudulent scheme as a whole, including executions