Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
United States v. Judy Arrington Gill
Citations: 193 F.3d 802; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 26376; 1999 WL 959175Docket: 98-4560
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; October 20, 1999; Federal Appellate Court
Judy Gill was convicted of stealing or converting government funds, specifically social security disability checks belonging to her son, Russell Gill, who was blinded and unable to manage his finances. After Russell moved in with Judy, she assisted him in applying for social security benefits and opened a joint bank account in both their names. Russell believed the account was solely his and did not authorize Judy to use the funds. While Russell lived at a rehabilitation center, Judy controlled the account, receiving and endorsing eleven social security checks totaling over $5,000, which she withdrew for her personal use. Gill was indicted for violating 18 U.S.C. § 641, asserting that the funds were not a "thing of value of the United States" and that there was insufficient evidence of intent. The jury found her guilty, and the district court sentenced her to thirty-six months probation, requiring restitution of $4,206 to the Social Security Administration. The Fourth Circuit upheld the conviction, emphasizing a broad interpretation of what constitutes a "thing of value of the United States," citing precedent that supports the government’s interest in funds until they are disbursed to rightful claimants. In United States v. Littriello, the Fourth Circuit determined that funds embezzled from the American Postal Workers Union Health Plan constituted federal money under § 641 due to significant federal oversight of the fund. Similar rulings in other circuits support this interpretation, including the First Circuit's holding that stealing a government check before it is cashed violates 18 U.S.C. § 641, as the government retains a property interest in the check. The Eighth Circuit further affirmed that an unendorsed U.S. Treasury check remains a "thing of value of the United States" even after being received by the payee. In the case at hand, the district judge appropriately denied Gill's acquittal motion, allowing the jury to determine the value of the social security checks, which were always considered government property. Since Gill intercepted the checks without Russell's consent, ownership did not transfer to him; rather, Gill exercised control over the money by endorsing the checks and depositing them into a joint account that Russell had not authorized. Consequently, the funds remained the property of the United States. Gill's reference to United States v. Howard was deemed irrelevant, as in that case, the government had lost its claim to the funds after they were deposited with the defendant's mother's knowledge. In contrast, Russell never received his funds, and the government incurred a loss from the theft. The jury was correctly allowed to consider that Gill exploited Russell's blindness to intercept the checks before he could access them, thus affirming her conviction for theft from the government. The court confirmed that there was sufficient evidence of Gill's intent to steal, as she knowingly intercepted and misappropriated the checks intended for Russell. The judgment of conviction was ultimately affirmed.