Filed: Aug. 20, 2010
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED _ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT AUGUST 20, 2010 No. 09-16102 JOHN LEY _ CLERK D. C. Docket No. 08-20587-CR-JAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RODOLFO GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (August 20, 2010) Before BARKETT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and HOOD,* District Judge. PER CURIAM: * Honorable Jose
Summary: [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED _ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT AUGUST 20, 2010 No. 09-16102 JOHN LEY _ CLERK D. C. Docket No. 08-20587-CR-JAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RODOLFO GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _ (August 20, 2010) Before BARKETT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and HOOD,* District Judge. PER CURIAM: * Honorable Josep..
More
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
AUGUST 20, 2010
No. 09-16102
JOHN LEY
________________________
CLERK
D. C. Docket No. 08-20587-CR-JAL
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RODOLFO GONZALEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(August 20, 2010)
Before BARKETT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and HOOD,* District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
*
Honorable Joseph M. Hood, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of
Kentucky, sitting by designation.
Rodolfo Gonzalez appeals his conviction for conspiracy to commit health
care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349. Gonzalez, the president and sole
director of City Wide Medical Supply Corporation (“City Wide”), was convicted
for participating in a scheme to defraud the Medicare program by submitting
almost $2.3 million in false reimbursement claims for durable medical equipment
that was never prescribed nor provided to patients. The government did not allege
that Gonzalez was involved in the preparation or submission of any false claim. Its
theory of the case was that Gonzalez knowingly participated in the scheme by
becoming the named owner of City Wide on behalf of his unindicted co-
conspirators, enabling them to use the company to submit false claims and disburse
the fraud proceeds while avoiding identification and apprehension by law
enforcement. Gonzalez’s defense was that he was the owner of City Wide in name
only and never knew that the company was submitting false claims to Medicare.
On appeal, Gonzalez argues that there was insufficient evidence presented to
support his conviction because the government failed to prove that he knowingly
participated in the conspiracy. Gonzalez also challenges numerous evidentiary
rulings, the jury instructions, and the denial of his motion for a mistrial due to
alleged jury misconduct. Finally, Gonzalez argues that due to cumulative error, he
received a fundamentally unfair trial.
2
We have considered the record, the briefs of the parties, and the oral
argument of counsel, and find no reversible error in the district court’s evidentiary
rulings nor in the decisions pertaining to the jury instructions. We also conclude
that the government presented sufficient circumstantial evidence for the jury to
conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Gonzalez knew the essential objective of
the Medicare fraud scheme and participated by signing the documentation to
acquire legal control over City Wide and its bank account, by signing blank checks
on that account, and by lying to federal agents to hide the identity of his co-
conspirators.
Finally, we cannot say the district court abused its discretion in denying
Gonzalez’s motion for a mistrial based on alleged jury misconduct. After a careful
inquiry, the judge based her conclusion on the jurors’ answers and her observations
of their demeanor while answering the questions. Moreover, the fact that the jury
reached a split verdict, acquitting Gonzalez of every charge except conspiracy to
commit health care fraud,1 supports the conclusion that the jury reached a reasoned
verdict and was not influenced by any extraneous evidence that could have
prejudiced Gonzalez. See Skilling v. United States, – U.S. –,
130 S. Ct. 2896,
2916 (2010) (“The jury’s ability to discern a failure of proof of guilt of some of the
1
Gonzalez was also charged with ten counts of health care fraud, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 1347, and four counts of aggravated identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1028A.
3
alleged crimes indicates a fair minded consideration of the issues and reinforces
our belief and conclusion that the media coverage did not lead to the deprivation of
the right to an impartial trial.” (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted)).
Accordingly, the district court was within its discretion to deny Gonzalez’s motion
for mistrial.
AFFIRMED.
4