United States v. Augustus Ohemeng
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Augustus Ohemeng, the medical director of the Pacific Clinic in Long Beach, California, appeals his jury conviction for six counts of health care fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1347 . Ohemeng claims that the government’s introduction at trial of evidence that he conducted unnecessary medical tests- constituted a constructive amendment, or, in the alternative, a prejudicial variance of the indictment. He further contends that the district court abused its discretion under U.S.S.G. § IB 1.3 when it calculated the loss amount to include the acts of appellant’s co-schemers. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and we affirm.
1. The admission of evidence showing Ohemeng billed Medicare for medically unnecessary tests and prescribed some recruited patients medically unnecessary power wheelchairs did not constructively amend the indictment because the crime charged in the indictment was not “substantially altered at trial, so that it was impossible to know whether the grand jury would have indicted for the crime actually proved.” United States v. Von Stoll, 726 F.2d 584, 586 (9th Cir.1984). The government provided ample evidence to establish…