United States v. Jones ( 2023 )

Case: 23-20192 Document: 00516935738 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/18/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
____________ FILED
October 18, 2023
No. 23-20192 Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar Clerk
____________
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Audra Jones,
Defendant—Appellant.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:18-CR-344-11
______________________________
Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Audra Jones pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit health care fraud,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1347 and 1349. She was sentenced to 30 months
of imprisonment. On appeal, Jones contends that the factual basis was
insufficient to support her guilty plea. Jones has also filed a motion for release
pending appeal.
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-20192 Document: 00516935738 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/18/2023
No. 23-20192
Contrary to Jones’s assertion otherwise, her initial statements during
the rearraignment hearing regarding her concern over whether she
committed the offense knowingly and willingly were not sufficient to “raise
a claim of error with the district court in such a manner so that the district
court may correct itself and thus obviate the need for appellate court review.”
United States v. Rodriguez, 15 F.3d 408, 414 (5th Cir. 1994) (internal quotation
marks and citation omitted). Accordingly, her challenge to the sufficiency of
the factual basis is reviewed for plain error. See United States v. Ortiz, 927
F.3d 868, 872 (5th Cir. 2019).
To show plain error, the appellant must show a forfeited error that is
clear or obvious and that affects her substantial rights. Puckett v. United
States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If the appellant makes such a showing, this
court has the discretion to correct the error but only if it seriously affects the
fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. Id.Before accepting a guilty plea, the district court “must determine that
there is a factual basis for the plea.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(3). Contrary
to Jones’s assertions otherwise, in reviewing whether the evidence is
factually sufficient to support the guilty plea conviction, this court “may look
beyond those facts admitted by the defendant during the plea colloquy and
scan the entire record for facts supporting [her] conviction.” United States
v. Ortiz, 927 F.3d 868, 873 (5th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and
citation omitted). “This includes the facts gleaned from the plea agreement
and plea colloquy, the factual findings relied upon in the presentence report
(“PSR”), as well as fairly drawn inferences from the evidence presented both
post-plea and at the sentencing hearing.” United States v. Trejo, 610 F.3d
308, 317 (5th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Conspiracy to commit health care fraud requires evidence “that (1)
two or more persons made an agreement to commit health care fraud; (2)
2
Case: 23-20192 Document: 00516935738 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/18/2023
No. 23-20192
that the defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the agreement; and (3) that
the defendant joined in the agreement willfully, that is, with the intent to
further the unlawful purpose.” United States v. Martinez, 921 F.3d 452, 467
(5th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). To be guilty
of health care fraud, a defendant must have “knowingly and willfully
execute[d], or attempt[ed] to execute, a scheme or artifice—(1) to defraud
any health care benefit program; or (2) to obtain, by means of false or
fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, any of the money or
property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any health care benefit
program, in connection with the delivery of or payment for health care
benefits, items, or services.” United States v. Moparty, 11 F.4th 280, 297 (5th
Cir. 2021) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). To establish a
willful violation of the health care fraud statute, “the Government must
prove that the defendant acted with knowledge that [her] conduct was
unlawful.” United States v. Nora, 988 F.3d 823, 830 (5th Cir. 2021) (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted). “Conspiracy has two intent
elements—intent to further the unlawful purpose and the level of intent
required for proving the underlying substantive offense.” Id. (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted).
In the instant case, the record in its entirety, including the PSR, the
factual basis as set forth in the plea agreement, the rearraignment transcript,
Jones’s statements at sentencing, and “fairly drawn inferences from the
evidence” show that Jones acted with knowledge that her conduct was
unlawful. See Trejo, 610 F.3d at 317. Additionally, despite Jones’s assertions
otherwise, her attorney did not stipulate to facts amounting to the functional
equivalent of a guilty plea. Instead, the factual basis in the plea agreement to
which she admitted explicitly provided that the federal agencies that
administered the health care programs in question affected interstate
commerce. While Jones also asserts that we cannot rely on the plea
3
Case: 23-20192 Document: 00516935738 Page: 4 Date Filed: 10/18/2023
No. 23-20192
agreement to evaluate her claim because the district court coerced her to sign
the agreement and plead guilty, her claim is unsupported by the record.
Accordingly, the district court did not plainly err in finding a sufficient factual
basis in support of Jones’s guilty plea. See Trejo, 610 F.3d at 313.
Based upon the foregoing, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED, and the motion for release pending appeal is DENIED as
moot.
4