The End of “Red Flag” Prosecutions?

Ronald
Thu, 31 Oct 2024 13:30:00 +0000
Uncategorized, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, 18 U.S.C. § 1347, 18 U.S.C. § 2320, 18 U.S.C. § 3231, 18 U.S.C. § 666, 19 CFR § 133.21., 21 CFR § 1301.74., 21 U.S.C. § 846, 28 CFR § 0.73., 42 CFR § 1001., 5th Amendment, 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, appeal, criminal, Criminal Justice, DEA, Drug Enforcement Administration, Drug Policy, Medical Practice Regulations

Ron Chapman is a Federal Defense Attorney and Author of Unraveling Federal Criminal Investigations. He’s spent a career beating the DOJ’s most difficult cases for his clients.

Ron Chapman argued United States v. Campbell in the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals before Judges Davis, Clay and White. Ron argued that the “deliberate ignorance” (sometimes called willful blindness) instruction that was given by the judge was improper.

Dr. Campbell was a prominent Louisville physician who was highly regarded by his peers and ran an exceptional practice. He was raided by the DEA but later acquitted of each and every alleged improper prescription. Grasping at straws the Government still attempted to argue conspiracy because Dr. Campbell “deliberately ignored” the actions of others. This wasn’t true. However, they secured a “deliberate ignorance” jury instruction which routinely results in conviction for a defendant.

This means that at the close of the trial the jury was permitted to determine willfull blindness – and therefore guilt – if the physician ignored the high probability of a “risk”. This is expressly what the Supreme Court rejected in Global-Tech when determining that the Federal Circuit’s standard for willfull blindness was incorrect.

The brief was authored principally by Chapman Law Appellate and White Collar Defense Attorney Matthew Pelcowitz. The case was argued by Ronald W. Chapman II.

The brief is below.