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. Ulit

February 17, 2009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
ALBERT ULIT SOCIAL SECURITY NO. 0 5 1 0 ALBERT SARIAN ULIT (LAST 4 DIGITS)



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Valerie Baker Fairbank United States District Judge

JUDGMENT AND PROBATION/COMMITMENT ORDER MONTH DAY YEAR

In the presence of the attorney for the government, the defendant appeared in person on this date.

X WITH COUNSEL David Reed, CJA

(Name of Counsel)

X GUILTY, and the court being satisfied that there is a factual basis for the plea. NOLO

CONTENDERE NOT GUILTY

There being a finding/verdict of X GUILTY, defendant has been convicted as charged of the offense(s) of: HEALTH CARE FRAUD in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1347.

The Court asked whether defendant had anything to say why judgment should not be pronounced. Because no sufficient cause to the contrary was shown, or appeared to the Court, the Court adjudged the defendant guilty as charged and convicted and ordered that: Pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. §3553(a) factors, and the Plea Agreement, it is the judgment of the Court that the defendant, Albert Ulit, is hereby placed on Probation, on Count 12 of the Indictment, for a term of 4 years: It is ordered that the defendant shall pay to the United States a special assessment of $100, which is due immediately.

It is ordered that the defendant shall pay restitution in the total amount of $897,247.67 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3663A.

The amount of restitution ordered shall be paid as follows:

Amount

Medicare $897,247.67

Restitution shall be due during the period of probation, at the rate of not less than $50 per month. These payments shall begin 30 days after the commencement of Probation. Nominal restitution payments are ordered as the court finds that the defendant's economic circumstances do not allow for either immediate or future payment of the amount ordered.

The defendant shall be held jointly and severally liable with co-defendants Lualhati Colgrove and Merlinda Soreno for the amount of restitution ordered in this judgment.

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3612(f)(3)(A), interest on the restitution ordered is waived because the defendant does not have the ability to pay interest. Payments may be subject to penalties for default and delinquency pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §

The defendant shall comply with General Order No. 01-05.

All fines are waived as it is found that the defendant does not have the ability to pay a fine in addition to restitution.

The defendant shall be placed on Probation for a term of 4 years, the first year to be served under home detention, under the following terms and conditions:

The defendant shall comply with the rules and regulations of the U. S. Probation Office and General Order 318;

During the period of probation, the defendant shall pay the special assessment and restitution in accordance with this judgment's orders pertaining to such payment;

The defendant shall apply monies received from income tax refunds greater than $500, lottery winnings, inheritance, judgments and any anticipated or unexpected financial gains to the outstanding court-ordered financial obligation;

The defendant shall participate for a period of one year in a home detention program which may include electronic monitoring, GPS, or voice recognition and shall observe all rules of such program, as directed by the Probation Officer. The defendant shall maintain a residential telephone line without devices and/or services that may interrupt operation of the monitoring equipment;

The costs of home confinement monitoring to the contract vendor is waived;

The defendant shall not be employed in any position that requires licensing and/or certification by any local, state or federal agency without prior approval of the Probation Officer;

The defendant shall not engage, as whole or partial owner, employee or otherwise, in any business involving medical clinic management or any other business or department involving medical billing without the express approval of the Probation Officer prior to engagement in such employment. Further, the defendant shall provide the Probation Officer with access to any and all business records, client lists and other records pertaining to the operation of any business owned, in whole or in part, by the defendant, as directed by the Probation Officer; and

The defendant shall cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample from the defendant.

The drug testing condition mandated by statute is suspended based on the Court's determination that the defendant poses a low risk of future substance abuse.

The defendant is advised of his right to appeal. The Court GRANTS government's request to dismiss all ...


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.