• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIAATLANTA DIVISIONUNITED STATES OF AMERICA ::CRIMINAL ACTIONv. ::NO. 1:06-CR-337-CCCHRISTOPHER STOUFFLET, :TROY SOBERT, :VLADIMIR ANDRIES, M.D., :THU ANH HOANG, M.D., :STEVEN DANIEL HOLLIS, M.D., :AHSAN U. RASHID, M.D., and :ANDRE D. SMITH, M.D. :OMNIBUS RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS'MOTIONS TO DISMISS, TO STRIKE SURPLUSAGE, ANDTO REVEAL INFORMATION BEFORE THE GRAND JURYComes now the United States of America, by David E. Nahmias,United States Attorney, and Randy S. Chartash and Lawrence R.Sommerfeld, Assistant United States Attorneys for the NorthernDistrict of Georgia, and files this OMNIBUS RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS'MOTIONS TO DISMISS, TO STRIKE SURPLUSAGE, AND TO REVEAL INFORMATIONBEFORE THE GRAND JURY as follows:BACKGROUNDDefendants were indicted by a federal Grand Jury sitting inthe Northern District of Georgia on August 8, 2006 [Doc. 1]. TheIndictment alleges, generally, that Defendants Stoufflet and Sobertwere proprietors of businesses which sold controlled substances andother prescription drugs to customers on demand. (See Indictment[Doc. 1] ¶¶ 18, 19, 27-32, 34-38.) Defendants Andries, Hoang,
Case 1:06-cr-00337-CC-JFK Document 149 Filed 03/14/2007 Page 1 of 39
 
2Hollis, Rashid, and Smith are each physicians who were employed atvarious times by Stoufflet and Sobert’s businesses to use theirstate medical licenses and DEA registration numbers to facilitatethe distribution of the drugs requested by customers. (Id. ¶¶ 20-33.) The doctors who distributed the controlled substances did notmeet nor speak with the customers, nor was customer informationconfirmed, other than the validity of the customers’ paymentinformation. (Id.) Put simply, the Indictment alleges that theDefendants each were part of a scheme to circumvent the drug lawsof the United States, enabling customers to order controlledsubstances and other prescription drugs without a legitimatemedical purpose and outside of the usual course of professionalpractice. (Id. ¶¶ 18-38.)In particular, the Indictment charges each of the Defendantswith conspiring to distribute controlled substances in violation of21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). (Indictment [Doc. 1], Count 1.) DefendantsStoufflet, Sobert, Smith, and Rashid are also charged withsubstantive counts of distribution of a controlled substance.(Id., Counts 2-4.) In addition, Defendants Stoufflet and Sobertare charged with money laundering and violations of the Food, Drug,and Cosmetic Act. (Id., Counts 5-51.)Prior to the pretrial conference held January 24, 2007, theDefendants filed the following motions to which the Court hasordered a written response: Hoang’s Motion to Dismiss and Request
Case 1:06-cr-00337-CC-JFK Document 149 Filed 03/14/2007 Page 2 of 39
 
3To Review the Legal Instructions Provided to the Grand Jury [Doc.76]; Rashid’s Motion to Dismiss Indictment [Doc. 79]; Sobert’sMotion to Strike Surplusage and in Limine [Doc. 82]; Smith’s Motionto Dismiss Indictment [Doc. 93]; and Stoufflet’s Amended Motion toDismiss Indictment Pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(2) [Doc. 96].Although different individual Defendants filed each of thesemotions, each of the Defendants adopted all of these motions,pursuant to the opt-out procedure established by the Court duringthe pretrial conference. This filing responds to all of theDefendants’ pretrial motions to which a written response wasrequested by the Court.DISCUSSIONI. DEFENDANTS MISCONSTRUE THE INDICTMENT AND THE CHARGES AGAINSTTHEM.Most of the Defendants’ arguments are based on a fundamentalmisconstruction of the Indictment and a misunderstanding of thecharges. The Defendants’ motions to dismiss ignore longstandingprecedent confirming that the Controlled Substances Act, 21, U.S.C.§ 801 et seq., outlaws a physician’s distribution of controlledsubstances outside of a legitimate medical purpose and the usualcourse of professional practice, see, e.g., United States v. Moore,423 U.S. 122, 96 S. Ct. 335 (1975), and instead focus on the
Case 1:06-cr-00337-CC-JFK Document 149 Filed 03/14/2007 Page 3 of 39
of 00

Leave a Comment

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