United States v. Stevens
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30107
| D. Maryland | 2011Background
- Indictment issued November 8, 2010 charging Stevens with obstruction of an FDA investigation (Count 1), falsification/ concealment of documents (Count 2), and four counts of making false statements (Counts 3–6) related to Wellbutrin off-label promotion.
- Stevens led GSK’s response to the FDA inquiry and headed a team of attorneys and paralegals gathering materials on Wellbutrin promotional activities.
- Government alleges Stevens withheld slide sets and attendee-compensation information and signed six letters with materially false statements to impede the FDA investigation.
- Stevens’ defense is that she acted in good faith reliance on advice of counsel, negating the requisite intent for the charged offenses.
- The government moved to preclude advice-of-counsel defense as to Count 2; Stevens moved for various pretrial dismissals and in limine relief; a March 17, 2011 hearing addressed these motions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether good faith reliance on counsel negates intent under §1519 | Stevens argues reliance should negate intent for Count 2 | Government contends §1519 is general intent, so reliance is irrelevant | §1519 is a specific intent crime; reliance negates intent; denial of gov’t motion granted as to Count 2? |
| Whether §1519 is unconstitutionally vague | Stevens asserts vagueness if no specific wrongful intent required | Statutory language with intent to impede/obstruct provides notice | §1519 not unconstitutionally vague when construed to require specific intent; motion denied |
| Whether Counts 1 and 2 are multiplicitous under Blockburger | Counts 1 and 2 share some facts but not elements | Different elements; not multiplicious | Counts 1 and 2 are not multiplicitous; both survive under Blockburger |
| Whether Count 2 states an offense | Count 2 covers writing false letters; some argue §1519 only preexisting documents | Courts allow creation of false documents under §1519 | Count 2 properly states an offense; indictment survives |
| Whether grand jury instructions on advice of counsel tainted indictment | Instruction erroneous; could influence indictment | No intentional misconduct; no willful prejudice shown | Indictment dismissed without prejudice due to grave doubt about grand jury may have been influenced; right to seek another indictment preserved |
Key Cases Cited
- Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States, 544 U.S. 696 (Supreme Court, 2005) (discussed mens rea as applied to §1512 and similar statutes; requires consciousness of wrongdoing for liability)
- United States v. Miller, 658 F.2d 235 (4th Cir. 1981) (good faith reliance on counsel negates intent element for certain offenses)
- United States v. Polytarides, 584 F.2d 1350 (4th Cir. 1978) (advice-of-counsel defense as part of intent analysis)
- United States v. Fontenot, 611 F.3d 734 (11th Cir. 2010) (court affirmed §1519 conviction for creating false documents; rejects preexistence requirement)
- United States v. Lanham, 617 F.3d 873 (6th Cir. 2010) (affirmed §1519 conviction for writing false reports; broad application of statute)