Tuesday, June 27, 2023

No Ruan Error Where Indictment Charged Needed Mens Rea

US v. Kim: Kim was a doctor who wound up running a clinic that “operated as a classic pill mill.” After a confidential informant posing as a patient made several controlled purchases of pain pills (and marijuana) from Kim and his business partner, Kim was charged with conspiracy and multiple substantive counts of distribution of a controlled substance. He eventually agreed to conspiracy and eight substantive counts. Kim balked during an initial plea hearing, but at a second he agreed to plead guilty after the district court told him “you can’t take it back. You’re bound by it.” He was sentenced to 78 months in prison.

On appeal, the Fourth Circuit affirmed Kim’s conviction. Kim’s primary argument was that his guilty plea was invalid under the Supreme Court’s decision in Ruan, which held that the Government must prove that the defendant doctor acted knowingly or intentionally with regard to their authorization (or lack thereof) to distribute drugs. After noting that the district court at a plea hearing is not required to tick through ever element of an offense, the court held that in Kim’s case there was no Ruan error because the indictment to which Kim pleaded guilty included the required element, even though Fourth Circuit law at the time did not require it. Even if there was error, Kim could not show the prejudice required to prevail on plain error review because he could not show that, but for the error he would have insisted on going to trial.

No comments: