U.S. v. Ferrell

In prosecution on Medicare fraud charge stemming from defendant’s submission of false claims of services rendered to clients, Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to admit two out-of-court statements made by third-party, who, according to defendant, gave inculpatory statements with respect to instant charge. Said statements did not qualify for exception to hearsay rule under Rule 804(b)(3) as statements against penal interest, even though third-party stated that defendant had done nothing wrong, and that he (third-party) “disregarded the law,” since third-party’s statements concerned actions that were not at issue in charged offense. Moreover, third-party’s close relationship to defendant called into question whether instant hearsay statements were trustworthy. Dist. Ct. also did not err in admitting testimony that defendant was setting up similar practices offering psychological services in other states, even though defendant argued that such testimony constituted improper propensity evidence. Said testimony qualified as either direct evidence regarding instant charged offense or as admissible evidence of defendant’s knowledge and intent with respect to charged offense.