California Penal Code Section 550(a) covers and defines healthcare fraud, which sometimes is also referred to as health insurance fraud and medical billing fraud. Healthcare fraud is submission of false claims or disinformation of healthcare insurers about care or services that may or may not have been provided. Penal Code Section 550(a) lists a range of unlawful conduct and here are some examples that could lead to California health care fraud charges:
To convict a person in health care fraud, the prosecutor has to do prove his engagement in one of the unlawful behaviors described in Penal Code Section 550(a) and also two additional elements of the crime.
These types of crimes are usually committed by health care providers including chiropractors, physical therapists, nurses, nurse practitioners, dentists, and administrators. If convicted of health care fraud, professional licenses can be suspended or revoked.
In California penalties for health care fraud depend on the amount of the fraudulent claim. Health care fraud claims of $950 or less. In case the claim is $950 or less then the health care fraud is a misdemeanor.
Penalties for misdemeanor medical and or health care fraud depend on the amount of the fraudulent claim, but may include the following:
In case the fraud was more than $950, then the crime of health care fraud is considered a wobbler. The defendant can be charged with either a misdemeanor or a felony conviction. Penalties for a misdemeanor conviction are:
Penalties for felony medical and or health care fraud include the following:
In case the charges involve more than one claim, then the key question is whether all the claims add up to more than $950 in twelve months period.
Hire the most dedicated California medical fraud defense lawyer to help defend and fight your Penal Code 186.10 charges. Our attorneys at KAASS LAW are highly dedicated to help our clients in every way possible. You can rely on our experienced lawyers in Glendale, Los Angeles, California, to carefully analyze the facts of your case to prove the facts necessary. We back all of our clients and we invite you to give us a toll free call at (310) 943-1171 to speak to our experienced Glendale criminal battery attorney today. Get in touch with us at KAASS LAW, 815 E Colorado St #220, Glendale, CA 91205, (310) 943-1171 at any time.
Penal Code section 148(a) Resisting Arrest aims to secure the physical wellbeing of officers, and encourages only compelling, legally applicable examinations of civilians. Lamentably, it isn't unprecedented for some officers to abuse this statute by rebuffing people who show any little sign of disobedience towards the officer. This is a serious and recurring issue all throughout California, with some counties and cities experiencing more of this abuse of power than others. For instance, Ventura county law enforcers are infamous for incarcerating civilians if the officer senses even the slightest amount of hesitation from the civilian. In many situations, this results in a gross and negligent abuse of power, originating from misinterpreted ideas of what the Penal Code 148(a) entails.
According to Penal Code 148(a)(1), any person who "obstinately" opposes or delays any law enforcement agent is blameworthy of a crime. They must demonstrate the following past a sensible uncertainty:
Most importantly, there does not need to be an intention of hurting the officer, a mere demonstration of knowingly resisting an officer is sufficient. As such, a prosecutor does not have to demonstrate that the defendant expected to commit a crime or even to cause any injury to the officer. Taking all of these elements into consideration, it can become murky and difficult to understand where to draw the line between officer aggression and defendant resistance. To help illustrate these, here are just a few examples:
California law generally prohibits individuals from recording confidential communications between two or more parties.
Under Penal Code Section 632 (PC-632), authorized under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, makes it illegal for an individual to record a “confidential communication” whether the communication is carried among one of the parties or recorded on a telephone.
California Penal Code section 632.7 enforces criminal liability upon persons who record confidential communications. While Penal Code section 637.2, enforces civil liability upon persons who intercept or receive a communication involving a cellular or cordless telephone and record the communication without consent.
Under Penal Code § 632(c), defines “confidential communication” as any communication disclosed between two persons in a private environment. This excludes communication exchanged between two people in a public environment because the conversation could be overheard or recorded by anyone within the vicinity of that area.
Failure to respect your clients' privacy can lead to loss of personal information, damage to your reputation, and resource waste. It increasingly has the potential to put you in legal trouble, result in significant fines, and trigger legal action. Invading privacy can lead to numerous outcomes in an unfavorable way. Additionally, invading someone's privacy is an offense that may get you into a lot of trouble, especially when you take into account the activities that are being taken in place.
The California Privacy Act is a wiretapping law. It prohibits the recording of confidential conversations without the consent of all participants. This includes telephone conversations. Victims of illegal wiretapping may be subject to legal damages. Breaking the law is a crime. Violators may face:
There are several avenues of defense that a skilled Glendale criminal defense attorney will utilize in order to defend their client in situations of unlawful arrest. A few examples of these defenses include: the use of excessive force or police brutality, acting in self-defense, or being wrongfully accused of a crime. Which path is best for your particular case is something your lawyer will be able to determine with you. If you feel that you or a loved one have experienced a wrongful accusation of violating Penal Code 148(a), or been the victim of police brutality or misconduct, please give us a call at (310) 943-1171 to speak to a defense attorney specialist, or send us an email with a description of your case at [email protected].
KAASS LAW is authorized to practice law in California. The above content is intended for California residents only. This content provides only general information which may or may not reflect current legal developments. KAASS LAW expressly disclaims all liability in respect to actions taken or not taken based on any of the contents of this website. The above content DOES NOT create an attorney-client relationship. KAASS LAW does not represent you unless you have expressly retained KAASS LAW in person at the KAASS LAW office. KAASS LAW helps clients in: Los Angeles, Burbank, Hollywood, Glendale, Van Nuys, North Hollywood, Studio City, Highland Park, Eagle Rock, Sunland, Tujunga, Sylmar, San Bernardino, La Crescenta, La Canada, Beverly Hills, Westwood, Santa Monica, Brentwood. Pacoima, Montebello, Commerce, Alhambra, Downey, Bell, Maywood, Walnut Park, Vernon, Lynwood, Echo Park, Silverlake, Mission Hills, Northridge, Woodland Hills, Encino, Canoga Park, North Hills, Porter Ranch, Chatsworth, Reseda.
(b) This section shall not apply to any of the following:
(1) Any public utility engaged in the business of providing communications services and facilities, or to the officers, employees, or agents thereof, where the acts otherwise prohibited are for the purpose of construction, maintenance, conduct, or operation of the services and facilities of the public utility.
(2) The use of any instrument, equipment, facility, or service furnished and used pursuant to the tariffs of the public utility.
(3) Any telephonic communication system used for communication exclusively within a state, county, city and county, or city correctional facility.
(c) As used in this section, each of the following terms have the following meaning:
(1) “Cellular radio telephone” means a wireless telephone authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to operate in the frequency bandwidth reserved for cellular radio telephones.
(2) “Cordless telephone” means a two-way, low power communication system consisting of two parts, a “base” unit which connects to the public switched telephone network and a handset or “remote” unit, that are connected by a radio link and authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to operate in the frequency bandwidths reserved for cordless telephones.
(3) “Communication” includes, but is not limited to, communications transmitted by voice, data, or image, including facsimile.
Pursuant to Roberts v. Wyndham defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' claims brought under Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 was denied because plaintiffs suspected a communication involving at least one cellular phone, which satisfied the California Supreme Court's interpretation of § 632.7.
The appeal of section 632.7 to plaintiffs is that it may not require the subject communication be confidential, unlike section 632. The question arises whether Section 632.7 applies to the parties involved in a cellular or cordless telephone call.
Please get in touch with KAASS Law for any questions or concerns.
647(j) PC is a section of the California Penal Code that describes the unlawful invasion of someone's privacy as a crime.
According to California Law here are types of criminal invasion of Privacy:
However, we should remember that a defendant is only guilty if he looks or records someone, and "the victim" was in a location where she had a reasonable expectation of privacy. These types on invasions regarding someone's privacy can lead to severe consequences that are very difficult to overcome.
By reviewing the circumstances of the case, a judge or jury will evaluate whether a legitimate expectation of privacy existed.
In California, criminal invasion/breach of privacy is classified as “disorderly conduct”. For example, it is a misdemeanor punishable by the following penalties:
Here are the examples:
In either of these circumstances, the penalty for violation of privacy may include:
Also, if the person had previously been convicted of the same offense, the fine might be increased to $10,000, as well as 1 year in prison.
Due to the use of technology, privacy can be invaded through social media platforms, emails, passwords to certain platforms that have private information saved, etc. However, in order to prevent that from happening, we can be take safety precautions to be aware of the consequences that might occur.
The consequences of criminal invasion of your privacy are very serious. The attorneys at KAASS Law are ready to help you determine your options. Therefore, If you or someone you know is subject to privacy invasion and have further issues and/or questions, feel free to contact us at 310.943.1171 for a free consultation. Our attorneys will evaluate the details of your matter and let you know what to expect and how you can proceed.