False Statements Flashcards
False statement statute 18 U.S.C. 1001
a) does not contain an oath requirement. Instead, it punishes unsworn falsifications relating to any matter within the jurisdiction of a federal department or agency.
b) As a general matter, prosecutions under § 1001 typically involve the use of false information: (1) to obtain a monetary or proprietary benefit; (2) to obtain a privilege from the government; (3) to resist monetary claims by the government; and (4) to frustrate a lawful regulation.
Exceptions to false statement statutes
does not include judicial proceeding (example in US v. Mcneill - inquiry into defendant’s finances for the purpose of being appointed counsel counted as a proceeding)
US v. Shah
false promises can count as false statements. Subjective test .
A promise about the future involves a statement of present intent to do what is promised and then a promise about the future. False Statement liability can only attach to the statement on present intent and often difficult to prove with evidence.
Brogan v. US
Exculpatory “no” doctrine - is the mere denial of wrong doing a false statement? still can count - not rooted in 5th amendment
Materiality for false statements
test for materiality is whether the statement has a natural tendency to influence or is capable of influencing any governmental action or decision. In determining whether a statement is material, the focus of the inquiry relates to its intrinsic capacity to influence, not its actual effect. Thus, neither actual influence nor reliance need be shown (both objective and subjective and either is enough)
US v. White Eagle
concealment can still fall under false statement if there was a duty to disclose (ethical duty not enough, and must be concealed from government) if knowing and willful
US v. Yermian
D lies about criminal record and employment history but did not know employer would forward application to a federal agency. Court says does not matter. “Knowingly and willfully” applies to false statement not awareness of federal agency.
Double Jeopardy
use blockburger test - offenses are not the same for double jeopardy purposes if each requires proof of an element that the other does not. If each offense requires proof of a fact that is not required by the other, Blockburger permits imposition of multiple punishments, even though the evidence required to establish each of the crimes may substantially overlap. (see US v. Ramos)
Procurement Fraud
major fraud act for contracts > $1 million ( US v. Brooks - for jurisdiction, look to prime contract (not individual subcontractors)
procurement fraud - separate violations?
each act (i.e. bill) can be a violation of act - if chronologically and substantially separate execution. still need to show intent for each item.
False Claims Act
(similar to major fraud act) But false claims violation requires that a claim for money or property be physically presented to the government. US v. Maher: statute does not specify an intent to defraud as a required element. Goal is to ensure integrity of vouchers and claims presented to gov. D carefully concealed stuff
certification of corporate financial reports
Sarbanes-Oxley Act made corporate managers assume responsibility for financial representations their companies make. New criminal statute requires chief executives and chief financial officers to certify the accuracy of periodic financial reports filed with the SEC
