UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ERIC KING - Articles

All Content

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ERIC KING

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Jan 16, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON MOTION FOR RELEASE PENDING APPEAL: Gary K. Springstead, SPRINGSTEAD BARTISH BORGULA & LYNCH, PLLC, Grand Rapids, Michigan, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ON RESPONSE: Laura McMullen Ford, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON REPLY: Kevin M. Schad, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant.

Judge(s): AVIS, MATHIS, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Cleveland

Defendant Eric King appeals his convictions for health care fraud, making false statements relating to health care matters, and aggravated identity theft. He moves for release pending appeal. The government opposes release. A person found guilty of an offense and sentenced to a term of imprisonment must be detained pending appeal unless a judicial officer concludes (1) by clear and convincing evidence that he is unlikely to flee or pose a danger to others and (2) that his appeal is not for delay and raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in a reversal, an order for a new trial, a sentence that does not result in imprisonment, or a lesser sentence sufficient to result in his release before the conclusion of his appeal. 18 U.S.C. § 3143(b); United States v. Chilingirian, 280 F.3d 704, 709 (6th Cir. 2002). “[A]n appeal raises a substantial question when [it] presents a ‘close question or one that could go either way’ and . . . the question ‘is so integral to the merits of the conviction that it is more probable than not that reversal or a new trial will occur if the question is decided in the defendant’s favor.’” United States v. Pollard, 778 F.2d 1177, 1182 (6th Cir. 1985) (quoting United States v. Powell, 761 F.2d 1227, 1233−34 (8th Cir. 1985) (en banc)).

Attachments: