Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Schulz

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

February 8, 2018

United States of America, Plaintiff,
v.
Angela April Schulz (1), Yahye Mohamed Herrow (3), Temitayo Ifeloju Olusholda Daniel (5), Abdisalan Abdulahab Hussein (7), Mukhtar Yusuf Hassan (8), Defendants.

          John Kokkinen, Assistant United States Attorney, for Plaintiff.

          Paul Engh, for Defendant Angela April Schulz.

          James Ventura, for Defendant Mukhtar Yusuf Hassan.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          FRANKLIN L. NOEL, United States Magistrate Judge

         THIS MATTER came before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge on January 8, 2018, on Defendant Angela April Schulz's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 229), and Defendant Mukhtar Yusuf Hassan's motions to suppress (ECF Nos. 242, 255, and 256).This matter was referred to the undersigned for Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.1. At the hearing, both the Government and Mukhtar Yusuf Hassan offered testimony. For the reasons set forth below, the Court recommends that Angela April Schulz's motion to dismiss be DENIED (ECF No. 229), and Mukhtar Yusuf Hassan's motions to suppress (ECF Nos. 242, 255, and 256) be DENIED.

         I. FINDINGS OF FACT

         A. The Superseding Indictment

         On August 15, 2017, a Grand Jury returned a Superseding Indictment against Angela April Schulz, Yahye Mohamed Herrow, Temitayo Ifeloju Olusholda Daniel, Abdisalan Abdulahab Hussein, and Mukhtar Yusuf Hassan (collectively “Defendants”). See generally, Superseding Indictment, ECF No. 195. The Defendants are accused of participating in a scheme to defraud automobile insurance companies by submitting claims and receiving reimbursements for chiropractic services that either were not medically necessary or were not rendered. Id.

         Schulz, a chiropractor and the chief executive officer of Meyer Chiropractic, P.A., is alleged to have paid Herrow, Daniel, Hussein, and Hassan to recruit automobile accident victims to show up for medical appointments and receive unnecessary chiropractic services. Id. ¶¶ 2-22. To insulate herself from the illegal payments, Schulz is alleged to have paid the Defendants through her receptionist Sammany Spangler. Id. ¶ 16. Schulz is alleged to have prescribed patients with similar, and often identical, treatment regardless of their physical condition. Id. ¶ 18. Under this scheme, Defendants are accused of causing automobile insurance companies to have paid millions of dollars as a result of false and fraudulent reimbursement claims. Id. ¶ 22.

         The Superseding Indictment charges Defendants with one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, and sixteen counts of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 2. Id. ¶¶ 23-26.

         B. Defendant Hassan's Interview on March 14, 2017

         On March 14, 2017, Defendant Mukhtar Hassan met with Special Agent Jonathan Ferris, with the Department of Commerce's Fraud Bureau, at Ferris' office in Saint Paul, Minnesota. Defendant Hassan arrived voluntarily, and entered the office through the main reception area. Defendant Hassan did not have to go through security. Once in the interview room, Defendant Hassan was informed that he was not under arrest and that he could leave at any time. Both agents whom Defendant Hassan met with were wearing coats or jackets that concealed their firearm. Special Agent Ferris informed Defendant Hassan of their investigation and Defendant Hassan made a phone call to his brother during the interview. According to Special Agent Ferris, Defendant Hassan did not appear to be impaired physically or mentally at any point during their conversation. The interview terminated when Defendant Hassan said that he needed to contact an attorney. The interview was not recorded by the agents.

         III. CONCLUSION OF LAW

         A. Defendant Schulz's Motion to Dismiss the Superseding ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.