False statements and false claims

• Author: Isabel Wigley/Shannon Benson/David Lincoln
• Pages: 781-805

FALSE STATEMENTS AND FALSE CLAIMS

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 781

II. FALSE STATEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 782

A. Elements of a § 1001 Offense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 784

1. Statements or Concealments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 784

2. Falsity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 786

3. Intent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 787

4. Materiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 788

5. Jurisdiction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 789

B. Section 1001 Defenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791

1. Ambiguity and Literal Truth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791

2. Double Jeopardy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 792

3. Recantation and Other Defenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 793

4. Guidance Against Charging “Exculpatory No”. . . . . . . . . 795

C. Sentencing Under § 1001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 796

III. FALSE CLAIMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 797

A. Elements of a § 287 Offense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 798

1. Presentation of a Claim Against the United States . . . . . . 798

2. False, Fictitious, or Fraudulent Claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 800

3. Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 801

B. Section 287 Defenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802

1. Intent-Based Defenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 802

2. Double Jeopardy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 803

C. Sentencing Under § 287 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 804

I. INTRODUCTION

Sections 1001 and 287 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code criminalize the same basic

conduct: lying to the government. Section 1001 prohibits knowingly and willfully

making a false statement in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive

branch and in certain matters within the jurisdiction of the congressional and judi-

cial branches.

1

Section 287 prohibits knowingly making a false claim upon or

against the United States, or any of its departments or agencies.

2

The two criminal statutes contain similar elements, and this overlap allows pros-

ecutors to bring fraud cases under either statute.

3

Moreover, because the statutes’

1. 18 U.S.C. § 1001.

2. Id. § 287.

3. See W. Bruce Shirk, Bennett D. Greenberg & William S. Dawson III, Truth or Consequences: Expanding

Civil and Criminal Liability for the Defective Pricing of Government Contracts, 37 CATH. U. L. REV. 935, 985–

86 (1988) (suggesting a set of hypothetical facts that could support a conviction under both § 1001 and § 287);

see also Julie R. O’Sullivan, The Federal Criminal ‘Code’ Is a Disgrace: Obstruction Statutes as Case Study, 96

781

language demonstrates Congress’s intent to create two distinct violations, prose-

cuting a defendant for a single act under both §§ 1001 and 287 does not violate the

Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

4

Although prosecutors may use both statutes to charge the same or similar con-

duct, there are significant differences between the statutes. For example, while

materiality is an element of § 1001,

5

the circuit courts are split on whether it is an

element of § 287.

6

See United States v. Newell, 658 F.3d 1, 16–17 (1st Cir. 2011) (declining to decide whether “materiality” is

an element of § 287 and noting that although the Fourth and Eighth Circuits have “read materiality into” § 287,

the Fifth, Ninth, Tenth, and Second Circuits have declined to do so and the Third Circuit has ruled that

materiality sometimes is an element under § 287); see also U.S. DEP’T OF JUST., CRIM. RES. MANUAL § 922,

https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-922-elements-18-usc-287 (last visited Jan. 16,

2023) [hereinafter CRIMINAL RESOURCE MANUAL] (discussing circuit split).

Additionally, § 1001 requires proof that the defendant know-

ingly and willfully lied to the government;

7

but, in certain circuits, § 287 only

requires proof that the defendant acted knowingly.

8

Furthermore, § 287’s juris-

dictional hook reaches “department[s] or agenc[ies]” of the United States,

9

whereas § 1001 applies to statements made “in any matter within the jurisdiction

of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch[es] of the Government of the

United States ....”

10

This Article describes the contours of the two statutes. Section II of this Article

discusses criminal prosecutions brought for false statements under § 1001. Section

III addresses criminal prosecutions for false claims brought under § 287.

II. FALSE STATEMENTS

Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code is a broadly written

11

statute

that criminalizes the act of making false statements to the United States govern-

ment.

12

Title 18 also contains several more specific false statement statutes, includ-

ing § 1035, which proscribes false statements relating specifically to health care

J. Crim. L. & Criminology 643, 653–55 (2006) (noting the redundancy in the federal criminal code, including in

sections pertaining to false statements, gives prosecutors “the ability to pick and choose among a smorgasbord of

statutes that might apply to given criminal conduct”).

4. See United States v. Allen, 13 F.3d 105, 109 (4th Cir. 1993).

5. See 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(1)–(3); see also H.R. REP. NO. 104-680, at 8 (1996), as reprinted in 1996 U.S.C.C.

A.N. 3935, 3942 (noting the “express requirement that all three offenses [in § 1001] have materiality as an

element”).

6.

7. See 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a).

8. See infra Section III.A.3 (discussing intent); see also CRIMINAL RESOURCE MANUAL, supra note 6, § 922

(discussing division of circuits on the issue of whether willfulness is an essential element of § 287).

9. 18 U.S.C. § 287.

10. Id. § 1001(a).

11. See United States v. Ricard, 922 F.3d 639, 651 & n.10 (5th Cir. 2019) (describing the statute as “[b]

reathtaking . . . in its broad and unsuspecting applications”).

12. 18 U.S.C. § 1001 was amended in 1996 to apply to all three branches of the federal government and to

include materiality as an element of each of its offenses. See False Statements Accountability Act of 1996, Pub.

L. No. 104-292, § 2, 110 Stat. 3459 (1996).

782 AMERICAN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [Vol. 60:781