Chapman, Dowling & Mallek - Washington, DC

Overview

Representative Clients

• United States v. Dr. Kumar - Court dismissed most counts in superseding indictment pre‑trial; “sex‑act” counts and over‑aggregated FDA counts tossed; limited FDA/fraud counts remained.

• United States v. Kendall Hansen: Six Acquittals and the Dismissal of the Remaining Charges. A federal jury acquitted Dr. Kendall Hansen on six counts in February 2024 and did not reach a verdict on two others. Prosecutors later dismissed the two unresolved charges. When federal agents search a medical practice, the accusation can quickly become larger than the medicine. Years of treatment may be compressed into prescription totals, selected patient files, and the most painful events in a practice’s history. In United States v. Hansen, the defense had to reverse that compression. Ron Chapman’s task was to show jurors not an ominous collection of numbers, but a physician making difficult decisions for real patients over a long career. The federal case arose after a 2019 search of Interventional Pain Specialists in Northern Kentucky. A superseding indictment charged Dr. Hansen and Dr. Michael Fletcher with conspiring to distribute controlled substances and with substantive distribution offenses. The charging document also sought forfeiture of professional licenses, registrations, and property. Those were allegations, not evidence, but they conveyed the stakes: liberty, livelihood, reputation, and the future of a medical practice were all in jeopardy. The official superseding indictment identifies the eight counts brought against Dr. Hansen. The government’s presentation reportedly reached beyond the prescriptions identified in the counts.

• United States v. Thomas Sachy: Rule 29 Trial Dismissals of Death Counts and a Time-Served Resolution. Dr. Thomas H. Sachy was charged with the death of two patients and approached Ron Chapman after pleading guilty. Ron’s first task was to withdraw the guilty plea which was an arduous task and prepare the case for trial. He was successful and secured Dr. Sachy’s release from pre-trial confinement. During trial, the most serious death-resulting distribution counts and other original charges were dismissed. Sachy then pleaded guilty to a conspiracy count in a superseding information and received time served with no supervised release. The most frightening counts in Dr. Thomas Sachy’s federal indictment carried mandatory 20-year minimum sentences because prosecutors alleged that controlled-substance prescriptions resulted in patient deaths. When the case reached trial in May 2023, the defense’s first objective was evidentiary: could the government actually establish the toxicology and causation proof needed to place those counts before the jury? Sachy, a Georgia psychiatrist, and members of his clinic staff were indicted in 2018. The government alleged unlawful prescribing, maintaining a drug-involved premises, and money laundering. The U.S. Attorney’s Office described those allegations in its indictment announcement “Middle Georgia Doctor And Clinic Staff Charged With Unlawful Prescribing Of Opioids”. As always, the indictment represented accusations, not findings of guilt.

• United States v. Bothra: How Dr. David Lewis Was Acquitted in a $464 Million Health-Care Fraud Trial - Few accusations are more intimidating than a federal health-care case built around a nine-figure number. In United States v. Bothra, prosecutors alleged that physicians at The Pain Center participated in a $464 million scheme involving medically unnecessary services and opioid prescriptions. The number made headlines. Ron Chapman’s defense of Dr. David Lewis focused on a more useful question: what did the patient records and the actual care prove? The federal indictment named Drs. Rajendra Bothra, Ganiu Edu, David Lewis, Christopher Russo, and others. Prosecutors alleged that the clinic used controlled-substance prescriptions to induce patients to accept unnecessary injections and other procedures billed to Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurers. The Department of Justice summarized those allegations—and later updated the same page to record the acquittals—in its announcement “Six Area Doctors Charged in Connection with $464 Million Health Care Fraud Scheme Involving Unnecessary Injections and Unlawfully Prescribed Opioids”. At trial in the Eastern District of Michigan, the government’s task was not simply to show high prescribing, high billing, or disagreement over treatment. Health-care fraud required proof of a knowing and intentional scheme, while the prescribing counts required proof that the doctors knowingly or intentionally acted without authorization.

• United States v. George Naum: A Supreme Court Victory That Reopened the Mens Rea Question - The Supreme Court of the United States granted Dr. George Naum’s petition, vacated the Fourth Circuit’s judgment, and remanded the case in light of Ruan in 2022. Some defense victories end a case. Others restore a legal question that the lower courts refused to recognize. Ron Chapman’s work for Dr. George Naum belongs in the second category. Dr. Naum was convicted of participating in a conspiracy and aiding and abetting unlawful Suboxone distribution through Advance Healthcare in West Virginia. At the time, courts often evaluated a prescriber’s conduct through an objective lens: whether prescriptions fell outside professional practice, sometimes with little room for a physician’s honest belief or subjective intent. That approach risked turning a medical-standard dispute into a felony without requiring the jury to find that the physician knew or intended to act without authorization. The central appellate strategy was therefore larger than any one chart. The defense preserved a mens rea argument: when a registered physician is authorized to prescribe controlled substances, the government should have to prove that the physician knowingly or intentionally crossed the line into unauthorized conduct. Negligence, regulatory error, or even objectively bad medicine is not automatically drug trafficking.

• United States v. Lesly Pompy: Converting "Red Flags" and Billing Analytics Into Reasonable Doubt - On January 4, 2023, a federal jury acquitted Dr. Lesly Pompy on every count that reached the jury. Several other counts were dismissed during the trial. Dr. Lesly Pompy’s federal case combined three prosecution theories that can overwhelm a physician when presented together: unlawful prescribing, health-care fraud, and maintaining a drug-involved premises. The government relied on undercover evidence, selected patients, prescribing “red flags,” and billing analytics. Ron Chapman answered by separating those theories and testing the factual premise of each. The investigation began with an undercover operation at Pompy’s Monroe, Michigan practice. According to the firm’s detailed trial account, the undercover investigator arrived with a fabricated referral and complaints of back pain. Dr. Pompy eventually prescribed a low dose of Norco after multiple visits. Agents later raided the office, and a federal indictment followed. The government’s original announcement alleged that Pompy had prescribed more than 6.1 million units of controlled substances and that his practice had submitted approximately $16.9 million in claims. It also alleged unlawful prescriptions and fraud involving office-visit coding. The Department of Justice announcement now includes an update recording his acquittal, “DR. POMPY WAS ACQUITTED OF THE CHARGES ALLEDGED IN THE INDICTMENT.

• United States v. Aggarwal: Full Acquittal in a West Virginian Suboxone Prescribing Conspiracy Case - In June 2019, a federal jury acquitted Dr. Krishan Kumar Aggarwal and Dr. Cherian John after an eight-day trial involving Redirections Treatment Advocates, a Suboxone practice in West Virginia. Dr. Aggarwal was represented by Ron Chapman. The jury found both physicians not guilty of conspiracy to distribute controlled substances outside professional practice. The government’s own post-verdict announcement “Two Pennsylvania physicians acquitted of drug charges” records the acquittals. During trial Ron Chapman explained the “West Virginia Model,” used an addiction-medicine expert, presented federal treatment guidance and patient-monitoring charts, challenged a government expert who had not practiced addiction medicine, and used a handwriting expert to identify forged prescriptions. Dr. Aggarwal received a complete acquittal of health care fraud and opioid prescribing counts.

• United States v. Meghnot: How William McCutchen Was Acquitted of the Clinic-Wide Conspiracy - The jury acquitted Dr. William McCutchen III of the controlled-substance conspiracy charge but convicted him on four substantive oxycodone-distribution counts. This was a meaningful partial acquittal which significantly limited Dr. McCutchen’s exposure to federal prison. Federal conspiracy law can make an employee or contractor responsible for a criminal plan far larger than his or her individual conduct. In the prosecution arising from the Meghnot Comprehensive Center for Hope, Ron Chapman’s defense of Dr. William McCutchen III succeeded in separating the physician from the clinic-wide conspiracy. The jury nevertheless convicted McCutchen on four individual prescription counts, so the result must be presented with precision. The government alleged that the Ann Arbor-Ypsilanti clinic operated as a cash-only pill mill. Its 17-count indictment charged the owner, office manager, and several physicians and claimed that the clinic charged $250 per visit while issuing controlled-substance prescriptions without a legitimate medical purpose. The DEA described the initial allegations in its March 2015 announcement “Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Doctors And Owner Of Pain Management Clinic Charged With Illegally Distributing Controlled Substance Prescription Drugs”. By the time McCutchen and Dr. Anthony Conrardy went to trial, other defendants had pleaded guilty.

• United States v. P. S. Initially charged with opioid distribution; resolved by plea to misdemeanor false entry in a medical record.

• United States v. F. C. - Pre‑trial diversion; motion to dismiss filed; restitution + supervision; no conviction.

• People v. Joseph Oesterling: A Michigan Jury Rejects the "Pill Mill" Narrative - In October 2017, a Tuscola County jury acquitted Dr. Joseph Oesterling on all criminal charges, including a criminal-enterprise count, five delivery counts involving Norco, and a drug-house count. Dr. Joseph Oesterling stepped into an existing Michigan urology practice after the prior physician died. He also stepped, unknowingly, into an existing drug investigation. The government treated undercover visits and prescribing decisions as evidence that the practice was operating as a pill mill. Ron Chapman’s defense reframed the case around a crucial fact: inheriting a practice under investigation is not the same as joining a criminal enterprise. The charges were severe. Michigan prosecutors accused Oesterling of conducting a criminal enterprise, delivering controlled substances, and maintaining a drug house. A conviction could have meant imprisonment, professional ruin, and the permanent loss of property already seized by the government. The investigation had begun before Oesterling acquired the practice. Undercover patients then sought Norco prescriptions. At trial, Ron Chapman cross-examined DEA agents, former employees, cooperating witnesses, and prosecution expert Dr. Carl Christensen. The timing supported a straightforward but powerful theme. A criminal-enterprise theory requires proof.

• People v. Quigley Felony opioid charges resolved by plea to misdemeanor false entry in a medical record.

• John Patrick Couch and Ruan v. United States: United States Supreme Court Case Vacatur - Ron Chapman represented Dr. John Patrick Couch in a separate Supreme Court petition. The Supreme Court GVR’d Couch’s case in light of Ruan. The Eleventh Circuit then vacated Couch’s substantive controlled-substance distribution convictions, but left other convictions intact. Couch was not acquitted on all charges and later remained subject to a 20-year sentence. Major appellate cases often have more than one name behind them. Ruan v. United States became the Supreme Court decision that changed the intent standard for physicians charged under the Controlled Substances Act. Dr. John Patrick Couch, tried alongside Dr. Xiulu Ruan, pursued the same core legal issue through his own petition. Ron Chapman served as Couch’s counsel of record at the Supreme Court. The prosecution arose from the doctors’ Mobile, Alabama pain practices and included controlled-substance, conspiracy, fraud, kickback, and racketeering allegations. At trial, the jury instructions allowed the government to obtain substantive prescribing convictions without requiring the focused subjective-intent finding later demanded by the Supreme Court. The appellate strategy was to keep Couch’s case aligned with the constitutional and statutory problem presented in Ruan: what must the government prove about an authorized physician’s state of mind? That distinction is critical.

• United States v. Eva Hamilton Five individuals, including Eva Hamilton, acquitted after trial; corporate entities convicted.

• United States v. Kontos: Victory for Joel Max Kupetz in the District of Arizona - Federal Court Orders Government to Return More Than $324,000 in Improperly Seized Assets Federal criminal defense attorney Ron Chapman secured the return of more than $324,000 in cash and cryptocurrency that the government had seized from his client, Joel Max Kupetz, before trial. The decision rejected the government’s attempt to treat legitimate assets as forfeitable merely because they were held in accounts that later received allegedly tainted funds. The Government Seized $6.6 Million Before Trial During a pre-indictment investigation, federal agents obtained warrants authorizing the seizure of approximately $6.6 million from three accounts associated with Kupetz: a U.S. Bank account, a Charles Schwab investment account, and a Coinbase cryptocurrency account. Kupetz was later indicted in the District of Arizona on charges arising from an alleged healthcare-fraud and wound-care scheme, including conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud, healthcare fraud, conspiracy to defraud the United States, receipt of healthcare kickbacks, and transactional money laundering. The charges remain allegations, and every defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The government sought to preserve the seized assets for possible forfeiture. Its position extended beyond money allegedly connected to the charged conduct: the government also seized funds and cryptocurrency.

• United States v. Loey Kousa: How Ordinary Rural Medicine Defeated Nine Federal Counts - On July 19, 2023, a federal jury acquitted Dr. Loey Kousa on all nine counts, including controlled-substance distribution, health-care fraud, and false-statement charges. Dr. Loey Kousa practiced primary care in Paintsville, Kentucky, a community where access to specialists can be limited and one physician may have to address many kinds of illness. The federal case against him began not with a complaining patient, but with an undercover operation. That origin gave Ron Chapman a clear strategic question: would the undercover visits prove drug dealing, or would they show a cautious physician gathering information before making a modest treatment decision? The government charged five controlled-substance distribution counts, two health-care fraud counts, and two false-statement counts in the Eastern District of Kentucky. The official indictment describes the government’s accusations. As with every indictment, those assertions were charges to be proved, not findings of fact. An undercover agent first visited during the COVID-19 pandemic in April 2021 and reported fabricated complaints. Dr. Kousa did not immediately issue the opioid prescription the operation was designed to investigate. He ordered diagnostic imaging, urine testing, and blood work; prescribed tramadol during the course of the visits; and only after multiple appointments prescribed a low dose of hydrocodone.