• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • 3
    CommentGo Back
 
United States District Court
For the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
)Linda L. Shelton)Motion for RemovalMovant/Defendant))State Court No. 04 CR 17571v.)Circuit Court of Cook County)State of Illinois)Honorable Jorge AlonsoRespondent/Plaintiff)Judge Presiding
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR STAY OF STATE COURT PROCEEDINGS
 NOW COMES Defendant, Linda Shelton, Pro Se who respectfully moves thisHonorable Court for a stay of State Court proceedings and in support of this motion statesas follows:Defendant was indicted on July 15, 2004 before the Circuit Court of Cook Countyfor the State offense of Medicaid Vendor Fraud, a violation of the Illinois CompiledStatutes, Chapter 305, Section 5/8A-3(a).For all the reasons stated in defendant’s Notice of Removal and Motion for Removal, this cause involves alleged acts that are a violation of 18 U.S.C. 371 mail fraud,18 U.S.C. 1341 filing false claims, and 18 U.S.C. 287 fraudulent claims, a violation of 18U.S.C. 1347 health care fraud. Therefore the federal court has original jurisdiction.This past week State Judge Alonso in extensive pre-trial rulings sealed theunconstitutionality of the trial proceedings by extensive, pervasive, and truly remarkabledue process violations by fiat, including denying right to self-representation, right tonotice, right to compulsory process, right to present viable and appropriate defenses, andother constitutional rights that guarantee a fair and unbiased trial as enumerated indefendant’s motion for removal, as well as motion for leave to file late notice of removal1
 
scheduled to be heard by Hon. Judge Bucklo on February 23, 2009, and notice of removal, including fatally defective indictment (lack of notice) and violation of speedytrial statutes (denial of right to prompt justice.)Defendant since 2004 indictment in State Court for Medicaid vendor fraud hashad to guess as to what the indictment (Exhibit A) meant by “scheme to submitfraudulent invoices”. They never have defined the details of this alleged scheme in termsof who was involved or what acts constituted the alleged scheme, except to say from July2000 to April 2002 defendant “caused fraudulent invoices” to be submitted. The IllinoisAttorney General (alleged prosecutor) through her Assistant Attorneys General JohnFearon and Patrick Murray (“AAG”) only said in Bill of Particulars that an invoice wasfraudulent if the defendant did not see the patient, even if another physician saw the patient, or an employee who was a licensed psychologist or clinical counselor saw the patient. How and in conspiracy with whom by what detailed method defendant “caused”fraudulent invoices to be submitted has still not been revealed by AAG as of the first dayof trial on February 17, 2009. What invoices including the patient names and dates of services and a detailed explanation of what was “fraudulent” about the invoices was notrevealed.The court repeatedly ordered the AAG to produce the invoices in discovery, buthas never enforced this order, so nearly five years after indictment the invoices (allegedinstruments of the crime) still have not been produced to the defense and defense is beingforced to proceed at trial without them.In the last 6 months the court finally ordered the AAG to give the defense a list of the names and dates of service for he patients for which allegedly fraudulent invoices2
 
were submitted. The AAG finally gave a list of six names with the dates of service, butstill no invoices. The AAG Patrick Murray said its “like a letter bomb”, they don’t haveto show who made it, how it was mailed, what mailroom it went through, or that even the person they alleged mailed it actually made it. They said they only have to show the jurythe “remittance advices” and “checks” issued to the alternate payee (the business). If thedefendant’s name is on the remittance advices which are generated by the State and giveonly the name of the patient, the date of service, the Current Procedural Code for theservice, the amount billed and the amount paid to the defendant by way of a check to thealternate payee, then defendant is guilty. The court agreed! Then the AAG said that theyhave these six patients who would testify and say they never were provided counseling bydefendant.The fact is that defendant upon receiving the six names went to the companyrecords, after obtaining a power of attorney over them, because the owner was on hisdeathbed and wanted the defendant to have access to them. She, a part-time consultantand employee, without any executive or financial responsibility to the group practice,discovered on her own investigation that two employees, the YEAR BEFORE defendantstarted working at the company fabricated phony patient encounter forms in 2000 andfaxed them to the contracted Billing Agent. The agent had received defendant’s Medicaid provider number from the business owner/CEO who had requested them from defendantso he could sign her up as a provider in preparation for her beginning work in 2001.The Billing Agent wrongfully assumed that the CEO’s signature on the businesscontract with her billing company authorized her to sign the name of ANY physician provider on ANY invoice, ANY power of attorney form, ANY Blue Cross/Blue Shield3
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
Rachel Thigpen

ANYONE CHARGE WITH MEDICAD FRAUD NEVER PLEAD GUILTY FROM 1992 UNTIL PRESENT HCFA 1500 CLAIMS HAVE BEN DESTROYED SEE ABBOT SPOLAGE CASE DISTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE IS A CRIME IN A CIVIL OR CRIMINAL PROCEDDING

reply08 / 04 / 2010
Dr Linda Shelton

The removal was denied because of previous higher court rulings that removal can only occur in a criminal case if there is racial discrimination. Therefore, the only option in the federal court is via habeas precedings

reply09 / 22 / 2009
Dr Linda Shelton

I have suffered a civil death due to corrupt acts of officials in IL. I need help. See my other pleadings on this site and my blogs at http://drlindashelton.wordpress.com and other blogs listed as links on that site for info about me. Either volunteer to help me pro bono or consider a donation. I plead with anyone who reads this to donate money to my legal defense fund at: Shelton legal fund, C/O Albukerk & Associates, 3025 W 26th St. 2nd floor, Chicago, IL 60625. You may call me Albukerk at 773 847-2600 for information.

reply09 / 22 / 2009
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...