Court Opinion

ID: 9806217
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 18:49:58.845733+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:02:41.790758
License: Public Domain

CALLAHAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur with the majority’s determination that there was insufficient evidence on Counts 1 through 8. I respectfully dissent from the majority’s determination that there was insufficient evidence as to Counts 9 and 10. Viewing all of the evidence in a light most favorable to the government, a rational juror could have determined that the “S.C.” listed in Counts 9 and 10 of the indictment referred to witness Soon Ok Chu, who testified at trial. Chu testified that she never met with a doctor and never received physical therapy, so a rational juror could have determined that any Medicare claims submitted on her behalf were false, regardless of the date they were submitted. Nonetheless, based on the government’s concession that retrial is required based on the erroneous admission of hearsay testimony, Lim’s convictions on Counts 9 and 10 must be vacated. I would therefore reverse and remand for retrial on Counts 9 and 10.