|
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JORGE A.MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant. |
|
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Ohio at Youngstown.
No. 04-00430—Donald C. Nugent, District Judge.
Argued: June 16, 2009
Decided and Filed: December 1, 2009
Before: KEITH, COLE, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.
COLE, Circuit Judge. A jury convicted Defendant-Appellant Dr. Jorge A. Martinez of eight counts of distribution of controlled substances, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (Counts 2-5, 7-8, and 10-11); fifteen counts of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (Counts 13-27); ten counts of wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (Counts 28-37); twenty-one counts of health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1347 (Counts 38-58); and two counts of health care fraud resulting in the death of patients, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1347 (Counts 59-60). Martinez’s appeal is based on his claims that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that the district court’s admission of a video portraying a non-witness physician performing medical procedures constituted reversible error. Martinez also argues that his sentence is both procedurally and substantively unreasonable. We AFFIRM.
|
L.C. COHEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee. |
|
Filed: October 6, 2008
Before: KEITH and COLE, Circuit Judges; STEEH, District Judge.
On October 27, 2006, this court issued an opinion affirming the district court’s judgment dismissing L.C. Cohen’s civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 2000bb, and 2000cc-1. The district court’s dismissal, and our affirmance, was based on Cohen’s failure to allege exhaustion of his available administrative remedies prior to filing his complaint. Our decision was in accordance with the law of this circuit at that time.
. . .
As our decision and the judgment of the district court was based on the precedents of this court that have been overruled in Jones, we therefore vacate our prior decision, reverse the district court’s judgment, and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings.