486 F. App'x 461
5th Cir.2012Background
- Lopez served as Chief Operating Officer of NCED (2002–April 2006) and NCED participated in the JWOD program.
- JWOD requires 75% direct-labor hours from severely disabled individuals and documentation supporting disability; Form 404 is annual certification via NISH.
- Lopez signed NCED’s Form 404 for 2003–2005; NCED reported combined hours of disabled and disadvantaged employees as hours by disabled employees.
- June 2005 meeting: Committee staff advised NCED that combining hours was improper and requested documentation for NCED’s 2005/2004 ratios.
- October 2005 Lopez signed the Form 404 as presented; later investigation revealed only 9% of direct-labor hours were by properly documented severely disabled employees.
- NCED eventually reduced staff and changed its name to ReadyOne; Lopez and others were indicted in 2008; López was convicted on conspiracy to make false statements and making a false statement on Form 404.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Materiality of the false statement | Lopez contends the 2005 Form 404 was not material to JWOD decisions. | Lopez argues the Committee already knew of reporting issues; the statement could not influence decisions. | Material; the statement could influence the Committee's JWOD eligibility decisions. |
| Intent to deceive | Lopez claims no intent to mislead; he acted on belief the Committee knew the reporting method. | Lopez signed to satisfy what Jones wanted; evidence supports an intent to deceive. | Evidence supports intent to deceive the Committee. |
| Loss determination under government-benefits rule | Lopez challenges loss calculation and seeks price-variance method. | Government-benefits rule applies; benefits to intended recipients should be excluded. | Government-benefits rule properly applied; some benefits to intended recipients excluded but not enough to lower guideline range; conviction affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Richardson, 676 F.3d 491 (5th Cir. 2012) (sufficiency standard de novo for acquittal review)
- United States v. Najera Jimenez, 593 F.3d 391 (5th Cir. 2010) (standard for sufficiency when reviewing evidence)
- United States v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506 (U.S. Supreme Court 1995) (two historical-fact questions in materiality analysis)
- United States v. Taylor, 582 F.3d 558 (5th Cir. 2009) (materiality and reliance standards for 18 U.S.C. § 1001)
- United States v. Shah, 44 F.3d 285 (5th Cir. 1995) (false statement requires intent to deceive)
- United States v. Guzman, 781 F.2d 428 (5th Cir. 1986) (intent to make a false statement must be purposeful)