899 N.W.2d 462
Minn.2017Background
- Tammy Jo Schoenrock served as a certified personal care assistant (PCA) for her mother, M.S., and submitted timesheets to Accra Care / Medica for PCA services.
- After M.S. moved to Schoenrock’s sister L.S.’s home, L.S. (not PCA-certified) provided much of the care, while Schoenrock continued submitting timesheets claiming she personally provided the hours.
- Schoenrock signed forms acknowledging PCAs are paid only for hours physically present and that timesheets must be accurate; she earned roughly $3,000/month from Accra Care while paying L.S. for care.
- Accra Care and Medica investigated and charged Schoenrock with two counts of theft by false representation under Minn. Stat. § 609.52, subd. 2(a)(3)(iii) for submitting false reimbursement claims.
- At trial Schoenrock argued she lacked intent to defraud (believing her sister was an "extension" of her and that services were provided); she was convicted and ordered to pay restitution; she appealed claiming the district court should have instructed the jury that "with intent to defraud" is a distinct element.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred by omitting the phrase "with intent to defraud" from the jury instruction on theft by false representation | Schoenrock: Williams requires intent to defraud be a distinct, separately stated element; omission materially misstates the law | State: CRIMJIG 16.05 (given) and 16.06 (given) together adequately conveyed intent to defraud; Williams is distinguishable | Even assuming omission was error, any instructional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Williams, 324 N.W.2d 154 (Minn. 1982) ("with intent to defraud" is a distinct element of theft-by-representation)
- State v. Wenthe, 865 N.W.2d 293 (Minn. 2015) (denial of a requested jury instruction reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- State v. Daniels, 361 N.W.2d 819 (Minn. 1985) (no need to give proposed instruction when its substance is included in court's instruction)
- Gulbertson v. State, 843 N.W.2d 240 (Minn. 2014) (court abuses discretion if jury instructions materially misstate the law)
- State v. Koppi, 798 N.W.2d 358 (Minn. 2011) (harmless-error standard for erroneous jury instructions)