Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
ABINGDON, Va. – Regan Dube, who along with her husband Michael Dube formerly owned and operated American Toxicology Labs, was sentenced this week in U.S. District Court in Abingdon, Virginia to three years of probation, four months of home detention, and 400 hours of community service. Acting United States Attorney Daniel P. Bubar and Virginia Attorney General Mark G. Herring made the announcement today.

The Dubes, of Johnson City Tenn., previously pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court in Abingdon. Regan Dube pleaded guilty to one felony count of health care fraud in the Western District of Virginia.  Michael Dube pleaded guilty to two felony counts of health care fraud (one filed in the Western District of Virginia and one filed in the Eastern District of Kentucky). Michael Dube is scheduled to be sentenced February 11, 2021.

“Regan and Michael Dube repeatedly defrauded the health care system for their own greed,” United States Attorney Bubar said today. “I am grateful to our state and federal partners for quickly working together to investigate this case and for their continued efforts to remove fraud from the health care system.”

“Individuals who take advantage of the health care system to line their own pockets should be held accountable and this sentencing sends a message that this will not be tolerated in Virginia,” said Attorney General Herring. “I want to thank my Medicaid Fraud Control Unit for all of their hard work on this and I also want to thank our local, state, and federal partners for their continued collaboration on important cases like this one.”

According to court documents, in March 2011, Michael Dube pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of Tennessee to one count of intentionally omitting information from reports as required under the Controlled Substances Act. As a result of his conviction, the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] informed Dube in a letter dated June 29, 2012, that he was excluded from participating in any federal health care program.

Nonetheless, in May 2013, Michael and Regan Dube established American Toxicology Labs [ATL] in Johnson City, Tennessee, with Regan Dube serving as the company’s registered agent, and using the couple’s home address as the principal office and mailing address. ATL then applied to participate in Medicare and Medicaid. On the applications, Regan Dube was listed as the owner of ATL, and Michael Dube’s name and participation in ATL was omitted.

ATL conducted urine screens for various entities who represented themselves to be opioid treatment facilities. Between May 1, 2014, and January 31, 2020, Medicare, Virginia Medicaid, Kentucky Medicaid and TennCare made payments to ATL that totaled approximately $8.5 million. During this time, Michael Dube made employment decisions, negotiated business arrangements with providers, and otherwise participated in the management of ATL.

In addition, Michael Dube also received kickback payments from third parties for referring individuals to those third parties for services for which payment was made (in whole or in part) by federal health care programs. These payments were deposited in Michael and Regan Dube’s personal checking account in a total amount of $441,646.

As a result of their guilty pleas, Regan and Michael Dube will pay a total of $9,015,046, plus interest, to be divided between special assessments, fines, restitution, and forfeiture. They will have to repay all of the money they received from Medicare and Medicaid programs.

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Food and Drug Administration Office of Criminal Investigations, Virginia Medicaid Fraud Control Unit of the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Virginia State Police, and Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. The prosecution of the case was conducted by Special Assistant United States Attorney and Assistant Attorney General Janine Myatt, and Assistant United States Attorneys Krista Frith, Randy Ramseyer, and Whit Pierce of the United States Attorneys’ Offices for the Western District of Virginia. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Kentucky and the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Tennessee provided valuable assistance.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
Roanoke, VIRGINIA – United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia Rick A. Mountcastle, Assistant United States Attorney and Professional Responsibility Officer Michael Moore from the Eastern District of Virginia, and a delegation from the Virginia Association of Commonwealth’s Attorneys, consisting of Greensville County/City of Emporia Commonwealth’s Attorney Patricia T. Watson, Virginia Beach Commonwealth’s Attorney Colin Stolle, Arlington County/City of Falls Church Commonwealth’s Attorney Theophani K. Stamos, and Suffolk City Commonwealth’s Attorney C. Phillips Ferguson appeared before the ethics committee of the Virginia State Bar this morning to deliver remarks in opposition of the proposed VSB Legal Ethics Opinion 1888 [VSB LEO 1888].

 

U.S. Attorney Mountcastle’s remarks as prepared for delivery:

 

Good morning ladies and gentlemen. My name is Rick Mountcastle and I’m the United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia.  I’m here with my colleague from the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia Assistant United States Attorney and Professional Responsibility Officer Mike Moore.  It’s my privilege to address you this morning on behalf of the United States Department of Justice and the two United States Attorney’s Office’s in Virginia about proposed Legal Ethics Opinion 1888.

 

After a careful review of the hypothetical facts, the analysis, and the proposed Opinion, as well as the applicable legal authorities, we respectfully request that you withdraw the proposed Opinion for the reasons set forth in our November 2, 2017 letter, as well as the many other reasons articulated by the Virginia Association of Commonwealth’s Attorneys and others.  I don’t want to repeat our written comments and I’m certain the Bar will give those comments careful consideration. 

 

I do want to emphasize a couple of points this morning.  First, the Department of Justice and the United States Attorney’s Offices take very seriously the requirement that our prosecutors comply with their discovery and disclosure obligations.  We expend considerable resources to ensure compliance with the Department’s mandate that we make broad disclosures of potentially exculpatory and impeaching material as required by the statutes, rules, and case law.  Further, we agree that prosecutors must not willfully and intentionally attempt to conceal exculpatory and impeaching evidence by hiding it within voluminous materials.

 

The proposed Opinion, however, does not provide clear guidance about this requirement but, instead, creates confusion.  As discussed in our written comments, the underlying hypothetical facts are so oversimplified that the proposed Opinion will apply to virtually none of the cases actually handled by federal and state prosecutors on a daily basis.  Every case will be different because every one of them will have more factual context than the facts set forth in the proposed Opinion.  We’ve listed some of the important factual context at page two of our letter and I’d like to add another very important factor to that list:  the tone of voice and inflexion of the defendant and the victim during the phone call.  As described in our letter, the factual context of each case is critical to a determination of whether a piece of evidence like the nine-word phone call “tends to negate guilt” as opposed to being inculpatory or merely ambiguous; it’s critical to a determination of whether the prosecutor “knows” that it “tends to negate guilt” when an equally fair reading based on all of the facts is that it’s inculpatory or ambiguous, and only defense counsel knows what material falls within the defense theory of the case; and it’s critical to a determination of whether producing it as a part of 200 hours of calls constitutes knowing and intentional concealment when the law only requires disclosure and the defendant knows about it or it’s readily identifiable from an index.

 

The substantial disparity between the hypothetical facts underlying the proposed Opinion, and the facts of the cases we actually prosecute will inevitably create the type of confusion described in our comments and in the comments of the Commonwealth’s Attorneys.  In our view, the proposed Opinion provides no meaningful guidance to the prosecutor because every case he or she prosecutes will be significantly different from the bare bones facts of the hypothetical.  At the same time, it’s likely that defense counsel, in zealously representing their clients, will argue that the proposed Opinion should apply to cases that have no factual similarity. As a result, the proposed Opinion, while providing no meaningful guidance, will simply cause collateral litigation distracting the courts and litigants from administering justice in criminal cases.

 

 For these reasons and the other reasons stated in our letter, we respectfully request that the proposed Opinion be withdrawn.  Thank you for this morning’s opportunity to provide additional comment.

 

End of Prepared Remarks

 

In addition to the remarks delivered this morning, the United States Attorneys and the Virginia Association of Commonwealth’s Attorneys previously sent the ethics committee letters objecting to VSB LEO 1888.

 

lettertovsb.pdf

vacaletter.pdf

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA – An associate of a violent extremist group the “Rise Above Movement” [RAM] pleaded guilty today to federal conspiracy-to-riot charges after admitting to traveling across the country to commit acts of violence at the torch-lit march on the University of Virginia grounds on August 11, 2017 and the Unite the Right Rally on August 12, 2017.  United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen, Special Agent in Charges Adam S. Lee of the FBI’s Richmond Division, and Virginia State Police Colonel Gary T. Settle made the announcement.

 

Cole Evan White, 24, of Clayton, Calif., pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in the Western District of Virginia to one count of conspiracy to violate the federal riots statute. At sentencing, White faces a maximum statutory penalty of five years in prison and a fine of $250,000. White, Benjamin Daley, Thomas Gillen, and Michael Miselis were indicted by a federal grand jury in October 2018 and charged with one count of conspiracy to violate the federal riots statute and one count of traveling in interstate commerce with the intent to incite a riot. Federal charges remain pending against Daley, Gillen, and Miselis.

 

“As Mr. White has acknowledged as part of his guilty plea, he and members of the Rise Above Movement (RAM) traveled to the ‘Unite the Right’ Rally in Charlottesville in order to engage in riotous conduct,” U.S. Attorney Cullen stated today.  “Although the First Amendment protects the rights of individuals and groups to assemble and protest peacefully, it does not give license to commit, attempt, or threaten acts of violence or otherwise engage in criminal activity.  We are grateful for the hard work and dedication of the FBI and the Virginia State Police in bringing these defendants to justice.”

 

“Mr. White's guilty plea today should signal to our Virginia communities that the FBI and our law enforcement partners are committed to keeping them safe and ensuring the events of 2017 in Charlottesville never happen again.  The FBI is committed to protecting every American's exercise of their First Amendment rights - irrespective of their message.  This case is not about the nature of Mr. White's speech or expression; this case is about traveling from out of state to riot here in the Commonwealth,” SAC Lee said today. “I want to thank U.S. Attorney Thomas Cullen and his team in the Western District of Virginia for their professionalism and expertise and I want to thank the outstanding men and women of the Virginia State Police who worked with us to piece together this investigation.”

 

“The arrests, and subsequent plea by Cole White, demonstrate the continuing commitment of the Virginia State Police and our federal partners to investigate and pursue those who committed acts of violence in the City of Charlottesville during the weekend of August 11-13, 2017,” said Colonel Gary T. Settle, Virginia State Police Superintendent. “These investigations are very time and resource intensive, but are necessary to make certain individuals like this are held accountable for their criminal actions.”

 

According to evidence presented during today’s guilty plea by United States Attorney Cullen and Assistant United States Attorney Christopher Kavanaugh, White was associated with the Rise Above Movement, [RAM], an openly extremist group whose members engaged in physical training and mixed martial arts street-fighting techniques. RAM frequently posted photographs and videos of themselves engaged in these activities, as well as of their attendance at various political rallies and events in California and Virginia.

 

White admitted today that, on or about April 15, 2017, he attended a political rally in Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Park in Berkeley, Calif. At that event, White met and befriended Benjamin Daley, who was with a group of individuals identified as members of RAM. Throughout the day there were many violent clashes between some rally attendees and those protesting the rally. White, alongside RAM members, followed a group of protestors who were leaving the area. White chased one protestor and attacked him, punching him several times in the head. Immediately afterward, White stood over top of another individual who was on the ground and punched him in the head approximately four to five times.  White admitted that none of these acts was in self-defense.

 

After fighting together in Berkeley, White, Daley, and other members of RAM stayed in contact through phone calls. In one call in the summer of 2017, Daley asked White if he was going to attend the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville. Daley offered to pay for White’s flight and his stay in Charlottesville and encouraged him to attend the event. Daley told White: “It’s going to be like Berkeley again…It’s going to be the event of the year.”

 

On or about August 9, 2017, White used his credit card to purchase a round-trip ticket from Delta Airlines for commercial flights from San Francisco International Airport to Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport, departing on August 11, 2017 and returning on August 13, 2017. White admitted that at the time of his travel he expected to engage in violent confrontations with protestors or other individuals at the upcoming events in Charlottesville.

 

Upon arriving in Charlottesville on August 11, 2017, White took a cab from the airport and met RAM members and several hundred other white supremacists gathered on the grounds of the University of Virginia for a torch-lit march on the evening prior to the Unite the Right rally. Throughout the march, participants chanted, “Blood and Soil!” and “Jews will not Replace Us.” The march culminated at the statute of Thomas Jefferson, where the hundreds of white supremacists surrounded a small group of counter protesters. Violence erupted among the crowd, with some individuals punching, kicking, spraying chemical irritants, swinging torches, and otherwise assaulting others, all resulting in a riot.  Among that riot, White admitted today to swinging his torch and striking several individuals and that none of these acts of violence was taken in self-defense.

 

The following morning, White, and members of RAM, attended the Unite the Right rally in Emancipation Park in Charlottesville, Va. White, Daley, and other RAM members were part of a larger group attempting to gain entry into the park following a declaration of “unlawful assembly” by law enforcement.

 

As they made their way through a group of protestors, White, Daley, and other RAM members, collectively punched, pushed, kicked, choked, head-butted, and otherwise assaulted several individuals resulting in a riot. White admitted to personally committing multiple acts of violence.  For example, after having already made his way through a group, White turned around and observed a protestor blocking the sidewalk by holding onto a street sign. White walked back, grabbed the individual by the shoulders, and punched him until he released the sign.  White then head-butted a male who he perceived was in his way. Finally, White head-butted a female protestor who was present on the sidewalk, resulting in a laceration to her face.

 

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Virginia State Police. United States Attorney Cullen and Assistant United States Attorney Kavanaugh are prosecuting the case for the United States.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
Lynchburg, VIRGINIA – A Lynchburg-based tax preparer, who along with two of his employees were preparing false tax returns in order to claim fictitious Earned Income Tax Credits, was sentenced today in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia in Lynchburg, Acting United States Attorney Rick A. Mountcastle announced.

 

Jackie G. Woodson Jr., of Lynchburg, previously pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit false claims. Today in District Court, Woodson was sentenced to 18 months in federal prison. Terry R. Rose was previously sentenced to 18 month in federal prison for her role in the conspiracy and Stella Hester-Jenkins was sentenced to 3 years’ probation.

 

According to evidence presented to the court during previous hearings by Assistant United States Attorneys C. Patrick Hogeboom III and Charlene R. Day, Woodson owned a Colbert/Ball Tax Service franchise in Lynchburg, Va., Rose and Hester-Jenkins were employed by Woodson as tax preparers.

 

Following an investigating by the Internal Revenue Service, it was determined that Woodson, Rose and Hester-Jenkins, were preparing and filing tax returns, which reported fictitious Schedule C income, which resulted in increased Earned Income Tax Credits and refunds. The conspirators often took these actions by claiming Schedule C income through babysitting or childcare income where none actually existed or by greatly exaggerating the amount of income being earned through these activities.

 

The Internal Revenue Service conducted the investigation of the case. Assistant United States Attorney C. Patrick Hogeboom III and Charlene R. Day prosecuted the case for the United States.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
Harrisonburg, VIRGINIA – The former officer manager of a Winchester-based company that provides safety services to construction companies, pleaded guilty yesterday in U.S. District Court in Harrisonburg for stealing more than $200,000 during her employment. United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen and Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring made the announcement.

Amy Jo Hansen, 44, of Inwood, West Virginia, waived her right to be indicted and pleaded guilty yesterday to one count of wire fraud. At sentencing, Hansen faces up to twenty years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

“Unfortunately, theft by trusted employees is more common than most people realize,” U.S. Attorney Cullen stated today.  “Where these type of embezzlement schemes involve the use of the mail, the internet, or other forms of electronic communication, they become federal crimes, and we will prosecute them.”

“So called ‘white collar’ crime is still crime and we will make sure that people who break the law like this are held accountable,” said Attorney General Herring.

According to court documents, Hansen was employed by Firstline Safety Management from 2001 until her termination in November 2018. During her tenure, Hansen worked as the office manager for more than 10 years. Her duties in that capacity included, but were not limited to, managing the office, ordering supplies, downloading credit card statements, coding purchasing for bookkeeping purposes, and sending invoices to another employee responsible for payroll and accounting.

At relevant times, Firstline utilized three access devices for the purchase of supplies and other work products. Hansen made numerous unauthorized, personal purchases on these devices. Initially, she submitted the credit card statements containing the unauthorized purchases to the company with the unauthorized purchases either miscoded to make them appear authorized or not coded at all.

Beginning in approximately January 2016, Hansen began altering credit card billing statements containing unauthorized purchases, using the edit function on Adobe software to modify the statements to falsely inflate charges from a vendor or create a nonexistent vendor charge, in order to cover up Hansen’s personal charges. The fraudulent charges increased throughout 2016, and by 2017 regularly involved unauthorized purchases of thousands of dollars a month.

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Office of the Virginia Attorney General.  Assistant United States Attorney Ronald M. Huber is prosecuting the case for the United States.

Score:   0.5
Docket Number:   WD-VA  1:20-cr-00021
Case Name:   USA v. Dube
  Press Releases:
ABINGDON, VIRGINIA – Michael Norman Dube, 59, who operated American Toxicology Labs, pleaded guilty today in the Western District of Virginia to health care fraud charges. Dube’s wife, Regan Gran Dube, 40, also pleaded guilty. United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen of the Western District of Virginia, United States Attorney Robert M. Duncan, Jr. of the Eastern District of Kentucky, and Virginia Attorney General Mark G. Herring made the announcement.

The Dubes, of Johnson City, Tennessee, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Abingdon. Michael Dube pleaded guilty to two counts of health care fraud (one filed in the Western District of Virginia and one filed in the Eastern District of Kentucky). Regan Dube pleaded guilty to one count of health care fraud in the Western District of Virginia. At sentencing, each defendant faces a maximum statutory term of imprisonment of up to 10 years. Regan Dube will be sentenced September 15, 2020 at 2:30 p.m. Michael Dube will be sentenced September 17, 2020 at 2:30 p.m.  

“The Dubes preyed upon a healthcare system that is supposed to help those in need. This is particularly egregious, given Michael Dube’s prior exclusion from federal health care programs,” First Assistant United States Attorney Daniel P. Bubar said today. “I am proud of the collaboration between our federal and state partners in Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee, which produced this just result.”

“Michael Dube defrauded Medicaid programs in two states, taking public money that he was not entitled to receive and furthering his own interests,” stated Robert M. Duncan, Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky. “Today’s guilty pleas are the product of close cooperation between two United States Attorney’s Offices and several law enforcement agencies and show our resolve in preventing fraud, waste, and abuse of the essential resources of government programs.”

“Healthcare fraud not only wastes hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, but it also undermines an important system that provides thousands of Virginians with critical medical services,” said Attorney General Mark Herring. “I am incredibly proud of the work my nationally-renowned Medicaid Fraud Control Unit has done and we will continue to work with our federal partners to pursue these egregious cases of fraud and abuse.”

“Opioid addiction continues to be a public health emergency and it is important that treatment providers act with honesty and integrity in combatting the crisis. In cooperation with our federal and state law enforcement partners, we will continue to investigate and bring to justice those who defraud federal programs of resources to fight this epidemic,” said Special Agent in Charge Mark S. McCormack, FDA Office of Criminal Investigations, Metro Washington Field Office.

“The Medicare and Medicaid programs require providers to be truthful on all documents and claims submitted,” said Maureen R. Dixon, Special Agent in Charge of the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “HHS-OIG will continue to work with our Federal and State partners to hold providers accountable for fraudulent actions and safeguard the Medicare and Medicaid programs from fraud, waste and abuse.”

According to court documents, in March 2011, Michael Dube pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of Tennessee to one count of intentionally omitting information from reports as required under the Controlled Substances Act. As a result of his conviction, the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] informed Dube in a letter dated June 29, 2012, that he was excluded from participating in any federal health care program.

Nonetheless, in May 2013, Michael and Regan Dube established American Toxicology Labs [ATL] in Johnson City, Tennessee, with Regan Dube serving as the company’s registered agent, and using the couple’s home address as the principal office and mailing address. ATL then applied to participate in Medicare and Medicaid. On the applications, Regan Dube was listed as the owner of ATL, and Michael Dube’s name and participation in ATL was omitted.

ATL conducted urine screens for various entities who represented themselves to be opioid treatment facilities. Between May 1, 2014, and January 31, 2020, Medicare, Virginia Medicaid, Kentucky Medicaid and TennCare made payments to ATL that totaled approximately $8.5 million. During this time, Michael Dube made employment decisions, negotiated business arrangements with providers, and otherwise participated in the management of ATL.

In addition, Michael Dube also received kickback payments from third-parties for referring individuals to those third-parties for services for which payment was made (in whole or in part) by federal health care programs. These payments were deposited in Michael and Regan Dube’s personal checking account in a total amount of $441,646.

As a result of their guilty pleas, Michael and Regan Dube will pay a total of $9,015,046, plus interest, to be divided between special assessments, fines, restitution, and forfeiture. They will have to repay all of the money they received from Medicare and Medicaid programs.

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Food and Drug Administration Office of Criminal Investigations, Virginia Medicaid Fraud Control Unit of the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Virginia State Police, and Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. The prosecution of the case was conducted by the United States Attorneys’ Offices for the Western District of Virginia (by Special Assistant United States Attorney and Assistant Attorney General Janine Myatt, Assistant United States Attorneys Whit Pierce, Krista Frith, and Randy Ramseyer) and the Eastern District of Kentucky (by Andrew Smith and Gregory Rosenberg). The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Tennessee provided valuable assistance.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1emRyd9261y_MP0DhMyzRA9lDX0r-Of2y2onURM_zx_Q/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2020-11-18 22:08:38 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Score:   0.5
Docket Number:   WD-VA  1:20-cr-00022
Case Name:   USA v. Dube
  Press Releases:
ABINGDON, VIRGINIA – Michael Norman Dube, 59, who operated American Toxicology Labs, pleaded guilty today in the Western District of Virginia to health care fraud charges. Dube’s wife, Regan Gran Dube, 40, also pleaded guilty. United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen of the Western District of Virginia, United States Attorney Robert M. Duncan, Jr. of the Eastern District of Kentucky, and Virginia Attorney General Mark G. Herring made the announcement.

The Dubes, of Johnson City, Tennessee, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Abingdon. Michael Dube pleaded guilty to two counts of health care fraud (one filed in the Western District of Virginia and one filed in the Eastern District of Kentucky). Regan Dube pleaded guilty to one count of health care fraud in the Western District of Virginia. At sentencing, each defendant faces a maximum statutory term of imprisonment of up to 10 years. Regan Dube will be sentenced September 15, 2020 at 2:30 p.m. Michael Dube will be sentenced September 17, 2020 at 2:30 p.m.  

“The Dubes preyed upon a healthcare system that is supposed to help those in need. This is particularly egregious, given Michael Dube’s prior exclusion from federal health care programs,” First Assistant United States Attorney Daniel P. Bubar said today. “I am proud of the collaboration between our federal and state partners in Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee, which produced this just result.”

“Michael Dube defrauded Medicaid programs in two states, taking public money that he was not entitled to receive and furthering his own interests,” stated Robert M. Duncan, Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky. “Today’s guilty pleas are the product of close cooperation between two United States Attorney’s Offices and several law enforcement agencies and show our resolve in preventing fraud, waste, and abuse of the essential resources of government programs.”

“Healthcare fraud not only wastes hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, but it also undermines an important system that provides thousands of Virginians with critical medical services,” said Attorney General Mark Herring. “I am incredibly proud of the work my nationally-renowned Medicaid Fraud Control Unit has done and we will continue to work with our federal partners to pursue these egregious cases of fraud and abuse.”

“Opioid addiction continues to be a public health emergency and it is important that treatment providers act with honesty and integrity in combatting the crisis. In cooperation with our federal and state law enforcement partners, we will continue to investigate and bring to justice those who defraud federal programs of resources to fight this epidemic,” said Special Agent in Charge Mark S. McCormack, FDA Office of Criminal Investigations, Metro Washington Field Office.

“The Medicare and Medicaid programs require providers to be truthful on all documents and claims submitted,” said Maureen R. Dixon, Special Agent in Charge of the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “HHS-OIG will continue to work with our Federal and State partners to hold providers accountable for fraudulent actions and safeguard the Medicare and Medicaid programs from fraud, waste and abuse.”

According to court documents, in March 2011, Michael Dube pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of Tennessee to one count of intentionally omitting information from reports as required under the Controlled Substances Act. As a result of his conviction, the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] informed Dube in a letter dated June 29, 2012, that he was excluded from participating in any federal health care program.

Nonetheless, in May 2013, Michael and Regan Dube established American Toxicology Labs [ATL] in Johnson City, Tennessee, with Regan Dube serving as the company’s registered agent, and using the couple’s home address as the principal office and mailing address. ATL then applied to participate in Medicare and Medicaid. On the applications, Regan Dube was listed as the owner of ATL, and Michael Dube’s name and participation in ATL was omitted.

ATL conducted urine screens for various entities who represented themselves to be opioid treatment facilities. Between May 1, 2014, and January 31, 2020, Medicare, Virginia Medicaid, Kentucky Medicaid and TennCare made payments to ATL that totaled approximately $8.5 million. During this time, Michael Dube made employment decisions, negotiated business arrangements with providers, and otherwise participated in the management of ATL.

In addition, Michael Dube also received kickback payments from third-parties for referring individuals to those third-parties for services for which payment was made (in whole or in part) by federal health care programs. These payments were deposited in Michael and Regan Dube’s personal checking account in a total amount of $441,646.

As a result of their guilty pleas, Michael and Regan Dube will pay a total of $9,015,046, plus interest, to be divided between special assessments, fines, restitution, and forfeiture. They will have to repay all of the money they received from Medicare and Medicaid programs.

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Food and Drug Administration Office of Criminal Investigations, Virginia Medicaid Fraud Control Unit of the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Virginia State Police, and Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. The prosecution of the case was conducted by the United States Attorneys’ Offices for the Western District of Virginia (by Special Assistant United States Attorney and Assistant Attorney General Janine Myatt, Assistant United States Attorneys Whit Pierce, Krista Frith, and Randy Ramseyer) and the Eastern District of Kentucky (by Andrew Smith and Gregory Rosenberg). The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Tennessee provided valuable assistance.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sAWYBLQtVqiNre9TkqdRgZdWNHDRuPNg_79I6k3jrIA/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2020-11-18 22:08:43 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Score:   0.5
Docket Number:   WD-VA  1:20-cr-00023
Case Name:   USA v. Dube
  Press Releases:
ABINGDON, VIRGINIA – Michael Norman Dube, 59, who operated American Toxicology Labs, pleaded guilty today in the Western District of Virginia to health care fraud charges. Dube’s wife, Regan Gran Dube, 40, also pleaded guilty. United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen of the Western District of Virginia, United States Attorney Robert M. Duncan, Jr. of the Eastern District of Kentucky, and Virginia Attorney General Mark G. Herring made the announcement.

The Dubes, of Johnson City, Tennessee, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Abingdon. Michael Dube pleaded guilty to two counts of health care fraud (one filed in the Western District of Virginia and one filed in the Eastern District of Kentucky). Regan Dube pleaded guilty to one count of health care fraud in the Western District of Virginia. At sentencing, each defendant faces a maximum statutory term of imprisonment of up to 10 years. Regan Dube will be sentenced September 15, 2020 at 2:30 p.m. Michael Dube will be sentenced September 17, 2020 at 2:30 p.m.  

“The Dubes preyed upon a healthcare system that is supposed to help those in need. This is particularly egregious, given Michael Dube’s prior exclusion from federal health care programs,” First Assistant United States Attorney Daniel P. Bubar said today. “I am proud of the collaboration between our federal and state partners in Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee, which produced this just result.”

“Michael Dube defrauded Medicaid programs in two states, taking public money that he was not entitled to receive and furthering his own interests,” stated Robert M. Duncan, Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky. “Today’s guilty pleas are the product of close cooperation between two United States Attorney’s Offices and several law enforcement agencies and show our resolve in preventing fraud, waste, and abuse of the essential resources of government programs.”

“Healthcare fraud not only wastes hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, but it also undermines an important system that provides thousands of Virginians with critical medical services,” said Attorney General Mark Herring. “I am incredibly proud of the work my nationally-renowned Medicaid Fraud Control Unit has done and we will continue to work with our federal partners to pursue these egregious cases of fraud and abuse.”

“Opioid addiction continues to be a public health emergency and it is important that treatment providers act with honesty and integrity in combatting the crisis. In cooperation with our federal and state law enforcement partners, we will continue to investigate and bring to justice those who defraud federal programs of resources to fight this epidemic,” said Special Agent in Charge Mark S. McCormack, FDA Office of Criminal Investigations, Metro Washington Field Office.

“The Medicare and Medicaid programs require providers to be truthful on all documents and claims submitted,” said Maureen R. Dixon, Special Agent in Charge of the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. “HHS-OIG will continue to work with our Federal and State partners to hold providers accountable for fraudulent actions and safeguard the Medicare and Medicaid programs from fraud, waste and abuse.”

According to court documents, in March 2011, Michael Dube pleaded guilty in the Eastern District of Tennessee to one count of intentionally omitting information from reports as required under the Controlled Substances Act. As a result of his conviction, the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] informed Dube in a letter dated June 29, 2012, that he was excluded from participating in any federal health care program.

Nonetheless, in May 2013, Michael and Regan Dube established American Toxicology Labs [ATL] in Johnson City, Tennessee, with Regan Dube serving as the company’s registered agent, and using the couple’s home address as the principal office and mailing address. ATL then applied to participate in Medicare and Medicaid. On the applications, Regan Dube was listed as the owner of ATL, and Michael Dube’s name and participation in ATL was omitted.

ATL conducted urine screens for various entities who represented themselves to be opioid treatment facilities. Between May 1, 2014, and January 31, 2020, Medicare, Virginia Medicaid, Kentucky Medicaid and TennCare made payments to ATL that totaled approximately $8.5 million. During this time, Michael Dube made employment decisions, negotiated business arrangements with providers, and otherwise participated in the management of ATL.

In addition, Michael Dube also received kickback payments from third-parties for referring individuals to those third-parties for services for which payment was made (in whole or in part) by federal health care programs. These payments were deposited in Michael and Regan Dube’s personal checking account in a total amount of $441,646.

As a result of their guilty pleas, Michael and Regan Dube will pay a total of $9,015,046, plus interest, to be divided between special assessments, fines, restitution, and forfeiture. They will have to repay all of the money they received from Medicare and Medicaid programs.

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Food and Drug Administration Office of Criminal Investigations, Virginia Medicaid Fraud Control Unit of the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Virginia State Police, and Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigations, and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation. The prosecution of the case was conducted by the United States Attorneys’ Offices for the Western District of Virginia (by Special Assistant United States Attorney and Assistant Attorney General Janine Myatt, Assistant United States Attorneys Whit Pierce, Krista Frith, and Randy Ramseyer) and the Eastern District of Kentucky (by Andrew Smith and Gregory Rosenberg). The United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Tennessee provided valuable assistance.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1mkZrLVKOATDMqBv_NT28rHKWjZSRkUefa__zanuZoc8/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2020-11-18 22:08:47 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Magistrate Docket Number:   WD-VA  1:20-mj-00034
Case Name:   USA v Dube
Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pmMmbR951-UYvh2dbozFVMJZ5offKKpkhEvC83jqhQA/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2020-11-18 21:59:46 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
Harrisonburg, VIRGINIA – The former officer manager of a Winchester-based company that provides safety services to construction companies, pleaded guilty yesterday in U.S. District Court in Harrisonburg for stealing more than $200,000 during her employment. United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen and Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring made the announcement.

Amy Jo Hansen, 44, of Inwood, West Virginia, waived her right to be indicted and pleaded guilty yesterday to one count of wire fraud. At sentencing, Hansen faces up to twenty years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

“Unfortunately, theft by trusted employees is more common than most people realize,” U.S. Attorney Cullen stated today.  “Where these type of embezzlement schemes involve the use of the mail, the internet, or other forms of electronic communication, they become federal crimes, and we will prosecute them.”

“So called ‘white collar’ crime is still crime and we will make sure that people who break the law like this are held accountable,” said Attorney General Herring.

According to court documents, Hansen was employed by Firstline Safety Management from 2001 until her termination in November 2018. During her tenure, Hansen worked as the office manager for more than 10 years. Her duties in that capacity included, but were not limited to, managing the office, ordering supplies, downloading credit card statements, coding purchasing for bookkeeping purposes, and sending invoices to another employee responsible for payroll and accounting.

At relevant times, Firstline utilized three access devices for the purchase of supplies and other work products. Hansen made numerous unauthorized, personal purchases on these devices. Initially, she submitted the credit card statements containing the unauthorized purchases to the company with the unauthorized purchases either miscoded to make them appear authorized or not coded at all.

Beginning in approximately January 2016, Hansen began altering credit card billing statements containing unauthorized purchases, using the edit function on Adobe software to modify the statements to falsely inflate charges from a vendor or create a nonexistent vendor charge, in order to cover up Hansen’s personal charges. The fraudulent charges increased throughout 2016, and by 2017 regularly involved unauthorized purchases of thousands of dollars a month.

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Office of the Virginia Attorney General.  Assistant United States Attorney Ronald M. Huber is prosecuting the case for the United States.

Score:   0.5
Docket Number:   WD-VA  5:19-cr-00017
Case Name:   USA v. Amnott
  Press Releases:
Harrisonburg, VIRGINIA – A Florida man, who conspired with others in a failed attempt to kidnap five children and kill their parents, pleaded guilty today in U.S. District Court in Harrisonburg to a series of charges related to his conduct, United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen and David W. Archey, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Richmond Division, announced today.

Frank Jesse Amnott, 31, pleaded guilty today to one count of conspiracy to commit the offense of kidnapping, one count of conspiracy to kill witnesses, and one count of brandishing, carrying, and using a firearm in commission of a federal crime of violence. The crime of conspiracy to kill witnesses carries a statuary sentence of mandatory life in prison.

“Although the facts of this case read like the script of a bad horror movie, the defendants’ murderous plot was real and it posed a grave risk to their intended victims,” U.S. Attorney Cullen stated today.  “I appreciate the diligence of the FBI and the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office in investigating this case and bringing these conspirators to justice.”    

“If not for the quick thinking of a parent, and the immediate dispatch and response of a Rockingham County Sheriff's Office deputy this incident could have evolved into something much worse,” Special Agent in Charge Archey said today. “We are grateful for the partnership of the United States Attorney's Office (WDVA) and the Rockingham County Sheriff's Office, and the assistance of our international partners regarding the work on this case.”

According to court documents, in 2014 Frank Amnott and his wife Jennifer Amnott befriended Valerie Perfect Hayes. Hayes consistently claimed to the Amnotts and others that she worked for the U.S. government and that her work included services for the intelligence community or some other clandestine capacity.

In July 2018, the Amnotts were living in Florida when they were contacted by Hayes, who was living with her boyfriend, Gary Blake Reburn, in Maryland.   Hayes claimed to the Amnotts that three of her children had been kidnapped and were in the custody of two separate Mennonite families in Dayton, Virginia.  Hayes asked the Amnotts for assistance in recovering these children, as well as two additional children. Hayes knew the Amnotts could not conceive their own children and promised that if they helped Hayes kidnap the children, then the Amnotts could keep one of the other children as their own.

Frank Amnott, Jennifer Amnott, Hayes, and Reburn devised a plan to travel from Maryland to Dayton, Va. to kidnap the children from these two homes.  To effectuate the kidnapping, the conspirators planned to kill the parents.  According to the plan, Hayes, Reburn, and Frank Amnott would enter the first house and hold the parents at gunpoint.  After the two children were secured by Hayes, Reburn and Amnott would execute the parents.  Then, they would drive to the second house, force entry, and perform a similar execution. In planning to kill the parents at both houses, the conspirators sought to eliminate witnesses to the abductions.  Afterwards, all of the children would be taken from Virginia to Maryland and the Amnotts would return to Florida with the child promised to them by Hayes.   

All five children to be kidnapped were younger than eight years old.  The conspirators were not family members to any of the children.  Moreover, none of the conspirators had legal custody, nor did they have any colorable claim to legal custody – based on fact or law – over any of the children.

On the evening of July 29, 2018, the conspirators put their plan into action. Jennifer Amnott remained in Maryland watching Hayes’ other children, but remained in contact, receiving updates from Virginia.  Hayes, Reburn, and Frank Amnott waited until the evening, at which time they drove to the first house.  There, Parents A and B, who are husband and wife, were preparing to retire for the evening while their two young children were already asleep. 

Hayes approached the door, disguised in clothing to appear as a Mennonite.  After Parent A opened the door, the group forced their way inside and held Parent A at gunpoint.  With Parent A subdued, Hayes began to look for Parent B and the two children.  Unbeknownst to Hayes, Reburn, and Amnott, when they forced their way into the home, Parent B had grabbed the cordless phone and ran outside of the house, hiding in a cornfield near the home. Parent B dialed 9-1-1 to report the incident and a deputy with the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office was immediately dispatched.

Inside the home, Amnott and Reburn took Parent A – at gunpoint – to the basement, where they bound his wrists together behind his back.  Reburn went upstairs as Amnott stayed and held Parent A at gunpoint.

Shortly after the 911 call, a deputy with the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office arrived on the scene and was met by Parent B, who had emerged from the cornfield.  At the same time, Hayes, who was also outside the house and still disguised in Mennonite clothing, approached the deputy and falsely claimed to be a neighbor who was passing by and saw an armed man run inside the house. Parent B was confused and suspicious, as Hayes appeared to be the same woman who she saw at the front door and forced entry into her home. Reburn joined Hayes at the front of the house and the deputy told Parent B to go with Hayes and Reburn.   At the deputy’s direction, Parent B entered a vehicle with Hayes and Reburn, who drove her to a nearby convenience store and dropped her off. 

Meanwhile, the deputy entered the house and located the children, who were unharmed and still in their bedroom.  The deputy proceeded to the basement where he encountered the defendant, Frank Amnott, holding Parent A at gunpoint in the basement. Amnott was taken into custody without incident.

Because their planned abduction and murders at the first house were thwarted by Parent B and law enforcement, the conspirators did not make their way to the second house as planned.  Instead, Hayes and Reburn returned to Maryland where they re-joined Jennifer Amnott.  In early August 2018, Hayes, Reburn, and Jennifer Amnott all fled the United States to the United Kingdom. 

They have since been apprehended and are pending extradition to the United States.                                                                                                         

The investigation of the case is being conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Rockingham County Sheriff’s Office.  Assistant United States Attorney Christopher Kavanaugh is prosecuting the case for the United States.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/138nYg3kAdcPmZULva5xK7SnSsG3uCdQcYC0Y4C0OiCw/edit#gid=0
  Last Updated: 2020-11-13 12:14:00 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the third highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE3
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE3
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE3
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
ROANOKE, Va. – United States Attorney Thomas T. Cullen announced today his office’s plan to make available $178,759 in grant funds to help improve offender intervention and rehabilitation efforts in three areas of the Western District of Virginia. The grant money is part of the Department of Justice’s Project Safe Neighborhoods [PSN] a nationwide program designed to create and foster safer neighborhoods through a sustained reduction in violent crime by, among other means, addressing criminal gangs and the illegal use of firearms.  More information regarding the U.S. Attorney’s Office PSN program, the available grant funds, and the grant-application process can be found at www.vachiefs.org/psn-wdva.

“Community-focused prevention, outreach, and rehabilitation efforts play an important role in reducing violent crime and gang-related activity,” U.S. Attorney Cullen stated today. “I am excited that my friend and former U.S. Attorney Tim Heaphy has agreed to oversee our grant-selection process and am confident that he will deploy these resources wisely.” 

The PSN Grant Program is eligible to nonprofits, community organizations and services providers, faith-based groups, and units of local or state governments that operate or have the ability to serve one of the three PSN target enforcement areas for the Western District of Virginia- the City of Danville, the City of Lynchburg, and the Roanoke County/Roanoke City region.

In recent years, violent crime has risen in Roanoke, Danville, and Lynchburg.  For example, in 2016 the homicide rate in Danville spiked from an average of four murders per year to 16 total.  Per capita, this homicide rate exceeded that of major Virginia urban areas like Richmond and Hampton Roads.  Intelligence and evidence attributes this violence to increased street gang activity, which is consistent with statewide crime trends. 

In response, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Virginia implemented PSN.  Called Project Community Justice, the backbone of PSN is the collaboration of community organizations as well as federal, state, and local law-enforcement agencies to build evidence-based and intelligence-led approaches to identifying the most violent gangs and offenders in each community and deploying their combined resources not only to prevent violent crimes but also, through offender intervention and rehabilitation efforts, to help break the cycle of violence by addressing its underlying causes.  The Grants Program is just one component of multiple concerted efforts the U.S. Attorney’s Office has implemented in Danville, Roanoke, and Lynchburg.

The United States Attorney’s Office recognizes that local government leaders, social service providers, neighborhood leaders, and members of the faith community are an essential part of a successful PSN program, especially those focused on at-risk youth and gang intervention efforts, and hopes that the available grant funds will enable local entities and nonprofits to further their missions of crime prevention and offender intervention and rehabilitation.

Under the program, $178,759 is available to eligible entities in the Western District of Virginia. Those funds will be divided between Danville, Roanoke, and Lynchburg. 

In order to administer its PSN grant funds, the United States Attorney’s Office has selected community members to serve as members of an independent Grants Committee.  The Committee is chaired by Timothy J. Heaphy, a former United States Attorney for the Western District of Virginia and the current General Counsel for the University of Virginia, and is composed of community-outreach experts, grant experts, community leaders, and former law-enforcement personnel.  None of the members are current federal employees, and no member will be eligible to apply for or receive PSN funding.  This Grants Committee has selected the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police and Foundation, Inc. (VACP) to serve as its Fiscal Agent for these funds. 

Complete applications should be submitted to suzanne@vachiefs.org by 5:00 p.m., on July 17, 2020.

Score:   0.5
  Press Releases:
Danville, VIRGINIA – The former owner and chief executive officer of an armored vehicle company with offices in Danville and Canada, was found guilty yesterday evening in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia in Danville of all federal charges levied against him, Acting United States Attorney Rick A. Mountcastle announced.

 

William R. Whyte, 72, of Ontario, Canada, was found guilty yesterday following a two-week jury trial on three counts of major fraud against the United States, three counts of wire fraud and three counts of false claims.

 

“Today’s jury verdict was the result of the outstanding teamwork among the United States Attorney’s Office, the Department of Justice’s Fraud Section, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.  It represents another step in the battle against fraud on the Department of Defense.  The defendant put his personal financial interests ahead of the safety of our brave men and women in uniform who risked their lives serving in Iraq,” Acting United States Attorney Mountcastle said. “I commend the outstanding work of AUSA Carlton, Trial Attorney Cottingham, the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.”

 

“The Defense Criminal Investigative Service remains vigilant to detect and disrupt the contamination of the military supply chain with defective parts and equipment. The fraud perpetrated in this matter could have resulted in the death or injury of American service members, impacting military operations in Iraq.  Along with our investigative partners, DCIS continues to aggressively pursue those who place our warfighters at risk,” said Special Agent in Charge Robert E. Craig, Jr, DCIS Mid-Atlantic Field Office

 

“Stealing from taxpayers by defrauding the government is bad enough.  Doing it in a way that imperils our warfighters and delivers to them equipment which is faulty or insufficient - that's a special kind of despicable,” Adam S. Lee, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Richmond Division said today.  “Whyte exposed our heroes and knew his Armet Armored Vehicles weren't up to the task of protecting them.  I hope this case sends a message to those who contract with the government to provide essential equipment to our troops in support of their critical mission; the FBI will be on your trail if you betray them this way and steal from the taxpayers who fund them.  I want to thank our partners at DCIS, the Department of Justice, and the United States Attorney's Office for the Western District of Virginia for today's outcome in this case.”

 

According to evidence presented at trial by AUSA Heather L. Carlton and Trial Attorney Caitlin Cottingham, Whyte was the owner and chief executive officer of Armet Armed Vehicles, Inc. Armet entered into a $4.8 million contract in April 2006 to provide the Department of Defense with 24 armored vehicles for use in Iraq.  In June 2006, Armet entered into a second contract, valued at $1.6 million, to deliver an additional eight armored vehicles. These vehicles were to be used as security vehicles to Iraqi “Tier 1” dignitaries, who were part of the then-newly elected government to replace Saddam Hussein and who regularly traveled by motorcade through a “hostile and dangerous environment.”

 

Both contracts included specific requirements for the armoring of the vehicles, including that each vehicle be reinforced to a standard at which an armor-piercing bullet could not penetrate the passenger compartment and ceiling. In addition, the contracts required the undercarriage of each armored truck have mine plating protection that could withstand explosions underneath the vehicles. Finally, the contracts required the armored vehicles to have run-flat tires, so they could continue to operate should their tires be shot out or otherwise damaged.

 

Despite the requirement in the contract that the first 24 armored gun trucks be delivered by July 31, 2006, Whyte and Armet failed to ship a single vehicle by that deadline. Armet ultimately supplied six armored vehicles after the contract deadline and was paid $ 2,019,454, including an approximately $824,000 progress payment requested by Whyte.  The prosecutors also presented evidence that Whyte intentionally misrepresented other issues to United States military officers about the contracts and vehicles.

 

None of the armored trucks delivered by Armet and Whyte met the ballistic and blast protection requirements of the contracts, despite the defendant’s claims that the vehicles met the standards. Whyte knew that each of the six armored trucks failed to meet the required standards and that they were intentionally under armored.

 

The investigation of the case was conducted by the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, the Department of Justice’s Fraud Section, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Heather L. Carlton and Department of Justice Fraud Section Trial Attorney Caitlin Cottingham.  

F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E