United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division
G. FLEISSIGQ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
matter is before the Court on the pretrial motions of
Defendants Devon N. Golding, Reuben F. Goodwin, Phillip L.
Jones, Dwight McTizic (“D. McTizic”), Nicole
McTizic (“N. McTizic”), Kazim A. Meo (“K.
Meo”), and Rehan Rana. As set forth more fully in the
Order and Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 350), Defendants are charged
in thirty-one counts with two conspiracies, four health care
fraud schemes and related substantive offenses alleged to
have occurred between 2009 and 2016 with respect to
specimen-testing by three different medical laboratories:
Allegiance Medical Services, LTD (“Allegiance”),
AMS Medical Laboratory, Inc. (“AMS”), and Western
Slope Laboratory, LLC (“Western Slope”).
Rana and Golding moved to dismiss the indictment, (ECF Nos.
139 and 199, respectively), and Defendant Rana moved, in the
alternative, for a bill of particulars (ECF No. 140).
Defendants Rana, Golding, D. McTizic, K. Meo and Jones moved
for early disclosure or production of Jencks Act materials.
(ECF Nos. 142, 200, 264, 267, and 301, respectively).
Defendants Rana, Golding, and K. Meo moved to compel
production of statements of non-cooperating witnesses. (ECF
Nos. 142, 200, and 267, respectively). Defendants Rana,
Goodwin, Golding, N. McTizic, D. McTizic, K. Meo, and Jones
moved to sever, variously, counts and individual Defendants.
(ECF No. 141, 186, 198, 257, 263, 266, and 299). All pretrial
motions were referred to United States Magistrate Patricia L.
Cohen under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).
Magistrate Judge held a hearing on Defendants' motions on
April 11, 2018, at which all Defendants appeared with
counsel, except two Defendants who waived their appearances
and appeared only through counsel, and Defendant Jones, who
appeared pro se, with standby counsel. At the
hearing, counsel presented argument, and the Magistrate Judge
ordered further briefing on one issue.
respect to the trial, various Defendants moved to sever the
trial on Counts 1-6 (involving Golding, Rana and K. Meo, and
alleging conduct occurring between 2009 and late 2012 related
to specimen-testing by Allegiance) from Counts 7-24
(involving Goodwin, Jones, and the McTizics, and alleging
conduct between 2012 to 2016 related to specimen-testing by
AMS). Defendants further requested severance of their trials
on Counts 25-31, which involved conduct of Anthony
Camillo and AMS with respect to the alleged health
care schemes related to specimen-testing by Western Slope.
The United States consented to these severance requests,
agreeing to a trial of Defendants Golding, Rana, and K. Meo
on Counts 1-6; a separate trial of Defendants Goodwin, Jones,
the McTizics, and AMS on Counts 7-24; and a separate trial of
AMS on counts 25-31.
Defendants also moved for further severance based on
allegations of improper joinder or to avoid prejudice under
Rule 14(a), Fed. R. Crim. P., including (i) arguments that
they should not be tried on any count in which they are not
named; (ii) arguments that they had no knowledge of or
interaction with some of the Defendants also named in their
severed trial; (iii) arguments that even if severed, joint
trials of Counts 1-6 or 7-24 would raise
Bruton issues, expose them to mutually
antagonistic defenses, require defense attorneys to comment
on a co-defendant's failure to testify, and result in
“spillover” that the jury would be unable to
Cohen issued an Order and Report and Recommendation, ordering
that Defendant Rana's motion for a bill of particulars be
denied and that Defendants' motions for early disclosure
of Jencks Act materials (ECF No. 264 and 301) and for early
production of Jencks Act materials and to compel production
of Jencks Act materials and to compel production of
statements of non-cooperating witnesses be denied (ECF Nos.
142, 200, and 267). Judge Cohen further recommended that the
motions to dismiss of Defendants Rana and Golding be denied;
and that Defendants' motions to sever be granted in part
and denied in part, ordering separate trials of Counts 1-6,
7-24, and 25-31, consistent with the consent of the United
States, but otherwise denying the various motions for further
severance or separate trials. (ECF No. 350).
D. McTizic filed Objections to the R&R, however he
thereafter withdrew his objection on July 17, 2018 (ECF No.
384). Defendant Rana filed an objection (ECF No. 360) to the
recommendation denying his motion to dismiss the indictment
(ECF No. 139) and to the order denying his alternative motion
for bill of particulars (ECF No. 140). The United States
filed a response to Defendant Rana's objections. No.
Defendants filed any objections to the Magistrate Judge's
recommendations with respect to severance or to the
Magistrate Judge's orders denying early production of
Jencks Act Materials or to compel production of statements of
non-cooperating witnesses. Nor did Defendant Golding file an
objection to the recommendation that his motion to dismiss
the indictment be denied.
party objects to a report and recommendation in a criminal
case, the court is required to “make a de novo
determination of those portions of the record or specified
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is
made.” United States v. Lothridge, 324 F.3d
599, 600 (8th Cir. 2003) (quoting 28 U.S.C. §
Court conducted a de novo review of Defendants'
motions to dismiss and of Defendant Rana's alternative
motion for bill of particulars, as well as the various
motions to sever. Based on that review, the undersigned
concludes that the Magistrate Judge made proper findings and
correctly analyzed the issues. The Court therefore adopts and
incorporates the thorough reasoning in the Order and Report
Defendants' Motions to Sever
careful consideration, and in light of the fact that no
Defendant filed any objections to the Magistrate Judge's
recommendation on the motions to sever, the Court will adopt
and sustain the well-reasoned recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge on the various motions to sever, for the
reasons set forth in the R&R. To avoid any issues
regarding improper joinder or prejudice from a joint trial,
and in light of the agreement of the United States to conduct
three separate trials, the Court finds it appropriate to
order separate trials of Counts 1-6, 7-24, and 25-31.
However, the Court finds Defendants' arguments for
further severance and separate trials to be unpersuasive, and
any issues with regard to Bruton to be unsupported
on the current record. As such, all such motions of
Defendants for further severance are rejected for the reasons
stated in the R&R.
Defendant Rana's Motion to Dismiss Indictment and
Objections, Defendant Rana objects to the Magistrate
Judge's findings that the indictment sufficiently charges
the offenses in Counts 1 and 3-6 against him, and that the
indictment sufficiently alleges the facts necessary to
support a “health care fraud scheme” under 18
U.S.C. § 1347, and a conspiracy against him. Based on a
review of the record, the ...