Opinion ID: 2644638
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Places

Text: The Government conceded in its response in opposition to Ellis’s motion to dismiss the indictment that the location of the acts weigh in favor of finding a single conspiracy. Additionally, the evidence shows that the two schemes were conducted out of a single office in Houston and later separated by only three 5 Clifford Ubani testified at the DME trial that there were prescription forms with check boxes that Family Healthcare’s employees generated for physicians to sign. Ana Quinteros testified at the DME trial that recruiters would also measure patients to determine the appropriate size of the equipment. Her testimony revealed, though, that the forms were pre-written only for the doctors that Family Healthcare paid for their signatures. The forms did not require the signature of a medically licensed nurse. Ellis testified that she had never filled out such a form. In contrast, the nursing notes involved in the skilled nursing case required documentation of patient conditions observed and treated by a medically licensed nurse, whose representations were subsequently used to determine a patient’s need for additional episodes of care and preserved in addition the physician’s prescription for home health care. 23 Case: 12-20095 Document: 00512456949 Page: 24 Date Filed: 12/02/2013 No. 12-20095 office suites. This factor weighs in favor of finding one conspiracy existed. Rabhan, 628 F.3d at 208. In conclusion, the time, statutory offenses, and places involved suggest that there was one agreement. Nevertheless, we hold that two agreements and two conspiracies existed because of the separate functions that central coconspirators provided in each scheme and the distinctive activity that the Government sought to punish in each case. See El-Mezain, 664 F.3d at 551. We reject Ellis’s argument that the Double Jeopardy Clause was violated.