Cook County Judges

Send your comments to picepil@aol.com (see about for guidelines)

Posts Tagged ‘Judge Pantle

Shelton Requests Chief Judge Evans Resignation

with 6 comments


STOP ILLINOIS CORRUPTION

Linda Lorincz Shelton, Ph.D., M.D.,

Founder and Chief Executive Officer

708 952-0040

 

April 19, 2009

 

Chief Judge Timothy Evans

Circuit Court of Cook County

50 W. Washington, Rm 2600

Chicago, IL 60602

 

        Dear Judge Evans:

            Thank you for your response letter of April 20, 2009. I understand your concerns not to involve yourself in judicial decisions concerning other judges. However, decisions on indigency petitions are not judicial decisions. They are administrative decisions. As chief administrator of the courts you are responsible for the employees under you including the judges, the clerk, and the court reporters. As you have now willfully refused to do your job and actually are condoning many criminal acts committed by judges under you, the Sheriff’s staff, the Court Clerk, and the Court Reporters, I MUST NOW ASK ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS OF COOK COUNTY FOR YOUR RESIGNATION. It is not acceptable for the Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County to engage in willful denial of due process on such a large scale, and at the same time to abdicate his responsibility as an administrator. The net result of your crimes is that you are participating in running the Circuit Court of Cook County as a criminal enterprise.

            It is clear from your previous responses to my concerns that you have no intention of doing your job as an administrator. Your court reporters have defied and still are defying court orders to prepare and file transcripts in 05 CR 29530 [correction – 05 CR 12718]. The Illinois Appellate Court has also violated their oaths of office and the law by failing to enforce Judge Kazmierski’s order to prepare free transcripts and file them.  Therefore, Federal Judge Coar has ruled in 09 C 105, a habeas corpus petition on this case, that the Appellate Court through their actions has waived the right of the State of Illinois to insist I exhaust State remedies with direct appeals and a petition for habeas before the Illinois Supreme Court. He is hearing my habeas petition on this [wrongful] conviction where a Cook County Correctional Officer, Sgt. Anthony Salemi, attacked me, falsified his records, perjured himself in court, and the Judge, Kazmierski, committed gross judicial misconduct and the prosecutors, Andrew Dalkin and John Maher committed gross prosecutorial misconduct resulting in an unfair trial denying me due process. Then Judge Kazmierski illegally sentenced me to two years in IDOC, refused to stay sentence pending appeal, in violation of U.S. Supreme Court Holding in Cunningham v. California, 127 S. Ct. 856 (2007). I fully expect to be vindicated and for the Sgt. to be arrested and convicted of official misconduct and other crimes and for the prosecutors to be charged with prosecutorial misconduct and punished appropriately.  Judge Kazmierski should be disciplined and I intend to find a way to hold him accountable in a court of law or before the JIB and press.

            Judge Maddux is running a criminal enterprise called the Law Division, which denies pro se litigants in particularly the constitutional rights to redress of grievances and due process. He does this by running an illegal and unconstitutional operation called the “Black Line Trial System” of which you are fully aware and condone.  He also illegally denies indigent petition and then violates law by ordering his clerks not to promptly give the litigant a copy of their petition and his order concerning the petition.  I have now publicized this misconduct and criminal RICO violation on the Internet. As you know Sheila Mannix has also documented and publicized the RICO operation run by the Family Court Division and its judges, which you apparently also condone. See:

Judge William D Maddux, in collusion with Sheriff Dart and Clerk Dorothy Brown, as well as with approval of Chief Judge Timothy Evans runs the Law Division of the Circuit Court of Cook Count as a Criminal Enterprise in violation of RICO. The following has been provided to the FBI and posted on my blogs:

 https://cookcountyjudges.wordpress.com/2009/05/19/judge-maddux-dismisses-torts-with-dual-court-assignments-for-same-case-hidden-black-line-trial-call-rico-violation/

 http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2009/05/judge-maddux-runs-law-division-cook.html

 Circuit Court of Cook County Family Division is Criminal Enterprise and committing RICO violations. See federal RICO suit brought by Dr. Sheila Mannix:

 1:09-cv-00103

 Dorothy Brown’s Clerk’s Office has violated Supreme Court Rules and failed to transmit a notice of appeal in a criminal case, as well as has refused to pepare a record of appeal in that case, along with permitting and condoning her staff in stealing court files from pro se litigants, extorting money from indigent litigants, and causing false arrest of indigent llitigants, as noted in above Internet blogs. As you are fully aware of these crimes and have failed to act to stop further crimes and remedy the above, you are aiding and abetting in such criminal acts, as well as attempting to cover them up.

 You are also fully informed that Judge Schultz, Gainer, Alonso, Pantle, Beibel have blatantly violated law, including Illinois Supreme Court Rules and United States Supreme Court Holdings. I also have evidence of misconduct of at least a half dozen other judges including Judges Kuriakos Ciecil, Brosnahan, Petrone, and Donnelly.

 http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2009/04/presiding-criminal-court-judge-paul-p.html

 http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2009/02/judge-jorge-alonso-overturns-federal.html

 http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2009/01/criminal-acts-il-attorney-general-lisa.html

 http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2008/12/save-life-dr-maisha-hamilton-bennett.html

 http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2008/12/lawless-corrupt-incompetent-wacko-cook_04.html

 http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2008/12/lawless-corrupt-incompetent-wacko-cook.html

 As Chief Judge of the Circuit Court you are responsible for referring judicial

misconduct to the JIB and you have failed to do so. You are also responsible for judicial assignments, yet you leave judges who blatantly violate the law in positions of authority and supervision over other judges. Your failure to do you job is not only irresponsible, but I believe purposeful.

             I have also fully informed the FBI about the above schemes and crimes, as well as your refusal to do your job. I believe these acts amount to felony theft of honest services, felony conspiracy to violate rights under color of law, felony violation of rights under color of law, obstruction of justice, extortion, fraud, official misconduct, and wire fraud, as well as other crimes including felony RICO violations.

             I respectfully therefore, as a citizen on behalf of the people of Cook County ask for your resignation as Chief Judge of the Circuit Court of Cook County.

Sincerely,

Linda Lorincz Shelton, Ph.D., M.D. 

CC:

FBI

State Police

Cook County State’s Attorney

Cook County Board

Select Advocacy Groups and the Press

Judge Jorge Alonso Overturns Federal Medicaid Code – Denies Mental Health Care to Illinoisans on Medicaid!

leave a comment »


Dr Linda Shelton, who has devoted her life to service of others and particularly to providing medical and mental health services to the poor, although found innocent on a wrongful charge of Illinois Medicaid Fraud, simply for trying to help people on Medicaid obtain mental health care, has suffered a civil death of defamation and destruction of her career and Illinoisans on Medicaid are still largely denied mental health care. Please read the following and help any way possible. I thank anyone who will help me.

This is a story epitomizing government corruption and greed, retaliation against whistle blowers, and gross government incompetence brought on by decades of fraud, patronage, and nepotism in Illinois.

Judge Jorge Alonso ruled on my  criminal case where I am charged with Medicaid fraud that “substitute billing is illegal”. This is where a doctor sends a bill to the insurance company for services performed by his employee such as the service of a nurse administering a vaccine or a psychologist administering a psychological test, or a cast technician applying a cast. In my case the Illinois Attorney General claims that if a doctor bills Medicaid for counseling (for drug addiction, post-traumatic-stress disorder after rape, obsessive-compulsive disorder, depression, dementia, etc.) if the counseling or psychological testing was done by an employee and not directly by the physician then it is a felony crime.

If substitute, also known as incident to, billing is illegal than ALL doctors in Illinois are guilty of a felony crime of fraud! God Help Us! Judge Alonso is so eager to railroad me and convict me that he is violating his oath of office to uphold the laws of the land and the constitution. Due process, guaranteed by the Bill of Rights REQUIRES that he follow the law. He is BLATANTLY violating the law, either maliciously or ignorantly due to his arrogance, incompetence, bias to run and support the alleged prosecutor AG Lisa Madigan, or his ego.

Physicians are NOT trained to do psychological testing for personality disorders or mental illness. Psychologists at the master’s and Ph.D level are trained to do so. These tests are invaluable in helping determine the right diagnosis and the right course of treatment. Judge Alonso has ruled that those on Medicaid are not eligible for this type of evaluation and treatment as a result of his illegal and unconstitutional ruling.

Many non-physicians are licensed in Illinois and all states to provide Psychiatric & Psychological Services:

1. nurses 225 ILCS 65,
2. clinical psychologists 225 ILCS 15,
3. licensed social workers 225 ILCS 20,
4. licensed clinical professional counselor 225 ILCS 107,
5. licensed marriage and family therapist 225 ILCS 55 and 68 ILAC 1283

Judge Alonso’s illegal ruling denies all of these people the RIGHT to practice their profession and denies the citizens of Illinois on Medicaid the Right under the Federal Medicaid Act to access to care equivalent to the care provided in the community.

Federal Judge Joan Lefkow ruled in August 2004, at the end of a 12 year civil rights class action suit that “Illinois Medicaid Policies and Procedures are in Violation of the Federal Medicaid Code because they Deny Access to Care” to children on Medicaid. This ruling is applicable to all Medicaid patients but the ruling only applies to children. It needs to be expanded to cover all Medicaid patients.

The Federal Medicaid Code, 42 U.S.C. 1396A(a)(30)(A), [regarding adults and children covered under Medicaid and the EPSDT program] REQUIRES any State Medicaid program funded by the federal government to provide care equivalent to that obtainable from private insurers in the community to Illinois Medicaid clients.

Therefore, Judge Alonso’s ruling is unconstitutional, unfair, illegal, and amounts to his ruling to overturn the Federal Medicaid Code as well as Illinois Statutes licensing non-physician providers of mental health services. As > 80 % of mental health services are provided by non-physicians this essentially shuts out mental health services to all but a few in Illinois who are poor.

The Federal Court and U.S. Attorney should intervene as this is illegal and also a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act in terms of discrimination.

As to my case, I am charged with billing for mental health services never done and substitute billing for mental health services between June 2000 and April 2002 while “working” at Right Frame of Mind & Associates (RFOM). Over the last six months when I obtained access to the old business records for RFOM I discovered the fact is that the year before I started working for a group practice called RFOM, part-time providing chart review for quality, consultation about medical and psychiatric policies and procedures, and limited patient care, two woman, who were partners with the CEO and without the knowledge of the CEO, in 2000 fabricated hundreds of patient encounter forms (filled out by doctors or therapists as to what patient they saw, the diagnosis, and what service was provided), that are later translated into bills or invoices by the billing agent, for services they never did. These two women, Itadel Shalabi and Nareman Taha never met me as they were fired before I started working there in 2001.

I had major neurosurgery in July 2000 due to a congenital spinal problem that was crushing my spinal cord and leading progressively towards quadraplegia. I was incapacitated for six months and heavily sedated with narcotics and other drugs for much of that time. I had agreed in early 2000 at the request of the CEO to be one of a dozen or more part-time medical directors to oversee quality of care, screen for medical disorders mimicking psychiatric disorders, help train the counselors to write better notes (many were foreigners with good counseling skills but a little difficulty with English writing), advise the CEO on best medical practices and standard of care, and provide physician services to patients needing medications.

I or my staff while I was in hospital gave the CEO my Medicaid provider number and other necessary documents so that the company’s billing agent Louise Moore of Data Medical Works could sign me up with Medicaid as a provider for the group so that they could bill for my services when I began to work, if I recovered, in 2001.

Ms. Moore I never met at the time was a sweet lady who is ignorant of a lot of things. She held herself out to be a expert at medical billing and she signed a contract with the CEO in early 2000 to set the group up legally to bill Medicaid. Nothing she did was actually proper, but it was not her own fault. She failed to tell the CEO he would be paid more if he had his group certified as a community mental health center. She was totally ignorant of the concept of community mental health centers (or the drug addiction and alcohol treatment centers – another center with its own enabling State Statue).

Under the Community Mental Health Service Act mental health groups that become certified bill Medicaid under the Center’s name and not under the doctor’s name. They also contract with the Illinois prisons, and/or DCFS (Illinois Child Welfare) or other agencies to provide comprehensive mental health services. They must have at least one medical director, but the director is an administrator and doesn’t have to see patients. Ph.D. psychologists or doctors or licensed mental health providers can supervise non-physician mental health service providers and bills can be sent in to Medicaid under the center’s name for all these services.

Ms. Moore ignorantly thinking (falsely) that her contract allowed her to sign the names of Right Frame of Mind employees on to any form signed my name in August and December 2000, without my or the CEO’s knowledge or consent, on a power of attorney form, an alternate payee form, and a blue cross/blue shielf electronic partner trading agreement form, which are all required to allow her to translate the patient encounter form to an electronic invoice and send it over the wire to BC/BS for adjudication, who then sends it to Medicaid, who then pays abut 30-40 cents on the dollar to the Alternate Payee (in this case RFOM).

Ms. Moore had spoken to the Medicaid Provider Service Unit about how to register the non-physician providers to bill Medicaid. She was told that non-physicians cannot bill Medicaid, was NOT told that a better way to bill was as a community mental health center or how to sign the group up as a community mental health center, and told that all bills (invoices) had to have a doctor’s name as the provider.

Then Ms. Moore, without my or the CEO’s knowledge changed the provider name in preparing invoices from Itadel Shalabi’s and Nareman Taha’s fraudulent patient encounter forms to my name so she could bill under my Medicaid Provider Number. I don’t believe that Ms. Moore had ANY knowledge of the fraudulent nature of the Patient Encounter Forms made by these two women.

Therefore the ghost billing charge is a result of ID Theft, resulting from both fraud by these two women and a comedy of errors by incompetent people advising Ms. Moore in the Medicaid Provider Service Unit, as well as her own blundering ignorance. I am totally innocent having not participated in any way in generating these bills or in receiving or using the money paid for them by Medicaid.

Ms Moore unfortunately is also guilty of mass fraud in all the work she has done in the past decade or more. It is illegal for an insurance biller to bill Medicaid based on a contract where they are paid by the percentage of funds received form Medicaid by the provider. Ms. Moore charged around 8% of all billings. This is illegal and considered fraud as it ties the billers service, which has nothing to do with the medical care provided, with the doctor’s service. Therefore, if she billed for a $100,000 procedure by a heart surgeon she would be paid $8,000 for sending in one bill, while when a family doctor bills $100, she would be paid $8. Providers of services to doctors are NOT ALLOWED to tie their services to the income from the actual medical provider. She MUST BILL ONLY by the piece of work such as $8 per bill. However, she has not been indicted for Medicaid Fraud and has not been sued by RFOM for Fraud in holding herself out to be an expert on billing when she was not.

The second aspect of the charge is substitute billing. I signed a Power of Attorney Form and Alternate Payee Agreement in August 2001. I was informed by the CEO sometime in late 2001 or early 2002 that the group was told by Ms. Moore that the counselors’ and psychologists’ services had to be billed under a doctor’s name so that bills on patients I had seen, but for dates of service when they were seen by a non-physician were being billed under my name. I had assumed that the billing agent was competent and doing the billing properly. I had assumed that substitute billing for employees services in mental health care was as legal as billing Medicaid for my nurse giving a patient a vaccine. I had no idea at the time that anyone considered substitute billing illegal. I had no knowledge that Ms. Moore had actually sent in tens of thousands of dollars worth of bills under my name before August 1, 2001 based on documents she forged and the fraudulent patient encounter forms from the above two women. Therefore, I told the CEO that was fine. I was not involved in billing or administration of the group except to fill out patient encounter forms when I saw a patient. I had a good faith belief that all was well.

I had also had an agreement that being part-time the business would limit my patient panel to 200 patients as I did not feel that part-time doctors should supervise the care of any more patients than this number.

Since Judge Alonso has unconstitutionally and illegally ruled that substitute billing is illegal I will be found guilty and likely sentence to prison for 4-15 years, as well as forever lose my medical license and reputation, along with my livelihood, future, friends, health as medical care is inadequate in prison and I am disabled with several serious medical disorders, and will to live. I have informed the U.S. Attorney, FBI, at the time Senator Obama, Senator Durbin, and now Senator Burris along with a lot of Congressmen and other Sentators and State legislators. I am receiving no assistance to solve this problem and restore mental health care in Illinois to those on Medicaid.

In late 2001 Ms. Lovett, Ms. Collins and others from the Office of Inspector General Medicaid contacted the RFOM and claimed that they needed to review some charts as a “standard review of a new practice to help us comply with the rules”. We completely complied and Ms. Lovett came out in 2001. She told the CEO the charts were well done and she would give us a report in 90 days. The CEO was actually very happy about this review because he wanted to make sure that our group practiced with the highest quality and had the best quality charting in the business. They never gave us a report or any feedback and their only response was to initiate a felony prosecution which culminated in the indictment of selectively me (and not one other of the dozen or so medical directors doing the same job – perhaps because only the CEO and I were whistle blowers about Illinois Governement Corruption and mistreatment of children in foster care and on Medicaid by the State) and the CEO.

After a number of months with NO feedback and strange comments from the Illinois State Police Medicaid Fraud Unit (part of the Illinois Attorney General’s Office), where the CEO had gone to inform them that he was concerned abut the integrity of our medical records because he had fired Itadel Shalabi and Nareman Taha for other administrative misconduct and inappropriate behavior with patients and they stole a hundred or so medical records (eventually returning parts of them) I began my own investigation of the rules of Medicaid. The State Police have not arrested them yet.

The CEO, I had learned over about a year was much more naive than I thought about running the business. I had assumed that he was qualified as an administrator and found out he was not. Finding out about the stolen charts and the lack of feedback from the OIG-Medicaid on this “routine review” concerned me. I was also concerned because in April 2002 the CEO told me that Ms. Collins at OIG-Medicaid had informed him to talk to Mr. Brown at Medicaid because there was a problem with the way our group was set up. Mr. Brown told the CEO that RFOM could not be a proper alternate payee under their rules and he apologized for misleading the CEO when the group was originally set up in 2000. He told the CEO that Medicaid could not continue to pay the group unless it was owned by the doctors. The group was the sole proprietorship of the CEO a master degreed psychologist. The CEO said OK, hired an attorney, and asked several of the doctors to be the officers of the group as it changed to corporate status. The corporation was set up so that the doctors would not actually profit from the corporation but were only paid by the hour for their work. The CEO was going to make a profit from managing the corporation. However, no profit was ever made as all the income went to overhead, particularly paying the counselors and doctors their salary and/or hourly rate. The CEO actually put in $100,000 of his own money to meet payroll before he closed the business as no viable financially. My total income from the group was about $5000 over all the time I worked there from 2001 to 2003. I always told the CEO to pay the other employees first and my work was only very limited and part-time.

Beginning in 2002, I researched the Federal and State Medicaid rules, policies, and laws so that I would be able to meet my fiduciary duty to participate in running the corporation at least from an advisory point of view. I discovered the following and this is why I told the CEO in mid 2002 and maintain this belief, that substitute billing is perfectly legal and actually REQUIRED by the Federal Medicaid Code as well as NOT PROHIBITED by Illiniois Statutes or Illinois Adminstrative Rules:

Federal and State Medicaid laws are extensive, complex, and immensely confusing. The State of Illinois is misusing them to indict doctors, psychologists, administrators of psychiatric and psychological practices for “Medicaid Fraud” when they are actually following federal law and providing needy services including counseling, drug treatment, suicide prevention, etc. Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Jim Ryan before her have targeted especially those groups run by whistle blowers, in order to falsely claim they are tough on fraud, to prevent Illinois from paying the bill for mental health services for the poor and needy on Medicaid, and reduce the bottom line.

A claim of “tough on fraud” will help AG Lisa Madigan win election as Governor. Failure to provide mental health care including drug addiction and alcoholism treatment leads to increased crime as drug addicts, alcoholics, and those that are so out of touch and mentally ill find alternatives to legitimate work to feed their habits or survive. Failure to provide adequate mental health care at the front end leads to much higher costs in the long run.

Code of Federal Regulations 42 CFR 414.34 states:
“Payment for services and supplies incident to a physician’s service”
“(b) Services of non[-]physicians that are incident to a physician’s service. Services of non physicians that are covered as incident to a physician’s service are paid as if the physician had personally furnished the service.

United States Code42 U.S.C. § 1396d(a)(5)(A)
requires reimbursement for “physicians’ services furnished by a physician.”

Code of Federal Regulations 42 C.F.R. § 440.50
The HHS rule implementing the Medicaid Act defines “physician services” to include services provided:
“(a) within the scope of practice of medicine or osteopathy as defined by State law; and
(b) by or under the personal supervision of an individual licensed under State law to practice medicine or osteopathy.”

United States Code42 U.S.C. §1396a(a)(32)(C)
Congress further authorized substitute billing under Medicaid for services furnished:
“by, or incident to the services” of another physician

Federal Regulation66 Fed. Reg. 55268
HHS makes clear in its preamble to this rule that it does not restrict the type of auxiliary personnel who may perform a given “incident to” service: “We deliberately used the term any individual so that the physician (or other practitioner), under his or her discretion and license, may use the service of anyone ranging from another physician to a medical assistant.”

Code of Federal Regulations42 CFR 411.15
“Particular services exclude from coverage” specifically states that:
“(m) (3) Exceptions. The following services are not excluded from coverage:

•(iii) Nurse practitioner and clinical nurse specialist services…

•(v) Qualified psychologist services,”

FEDERAL PREEMPTION SUSTAINED BY FEDERAL 2ND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL
•A Federal suit for a psychiatrist against the New York Medicaid Program based on its refusal to approve Medicaid was agreed to for reimbursement for services provided by his employees under his supervision. Yapalater v. Bates, 494 F. Supp. 1349 (S.D.N.Y. 1980), aff’d, 644 F.2d 131 (2d Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 908, 102 S. Ct. 1255 (1982).
The court determined that the federal Medicaid rule at 42 C.F.R. §440.50 defining “physician services” unquestionably included supervisees other than the physician, just as the same rule must apply here to vacate Plaintiffs’ indictments. Id. at 1363-64.

State Medicaid must Provide Services 42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)30(A)
•Federal Code clearly mandates that State Medicaid plans must provide services to recipients of Medicaid and payment to their service providers equivalent to care and services provided to the general population by private insurers
•Private insurance pays for psychiatric services provided by counselors and psychologists
•RFOM CEO and other employees, besides the physicians were licensed counselors, nurses, psychological therapist, or social workers, per CEO

42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)30(A)
A State plan for medical assistance must
Provide such methods and procedures relating to the utilization of, and the payment for, care and services available under the plan . . . to assure that payments are … sufficient to enlist enough providers so that care and services are available under the plan … at least to the extent that such care and services are available to the general population in the geographic area“,

Ambiguous State Laws Must be Interpreted to Conform to Fed Law
•The Federal 7th Circuit Court of Appeals has also construed ambiguous state regulations to conform to federal Medicaid requirements,
•an approach worth revisiting here with respect to Sections 140.411 and 140.413 of the Illinois Administrative Code.
•See Evanston Hosp. v. Hauck 1 F.3d 540 (7th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1091 (1994).

I (SHELTON) CONTINUES HER OWN INVESTIGATION OF BILLING PRACTICES – 2002-2005

•Shelton discovers that Physician Medicaid Manual has inconsistencies, in one place stating bills for employees billed under doctor’s name, and in another place stating that no psychiatric services can be billed for non-physicians, yet in another place stating that non-physicians may provide psychiatric services and Medicaid may be billed. She also discovered the Illinois Community Mental Health Center Code.

Illinois Administrative Code (IAC)
89 IAC 140.12

“Services Not Covered by Physician”
DOES NOT MENTION psychiatric services by non-physicians

Illinois Administrative Code
89 IAC 140.400(a)
“Payment to Practitioners”
“2) A practitioner may bill only for services he or she personally provides or which are provided under his or her direct supervision in his or her office by his or her staff.”

Illinois Administrative Code
89 IAC 140.411

“Covered Services by Physicians”
“The Department shall pay physicians for the provision of services not otherwise excluded which are:
. . .
c) Provided by the physician or by a member of the physician’s staff under the physician’s direct supervision

Illinois Administrative Code
89 IAC 140.413

“Limitations on Physician Services”
that “limitations” on physician’s services include that psychiatric services will be paid for if they are “. . . provided by a physician . . .” [It does not exclude non-physician services and it is a reasonable inference to conclude the definition of “physician” include the services of non-physician employees, under the doctor’s supervision as defined in 89 IAC 140.400 & 411]

How does this negate previous definition of “physician services” which include incident services by his employees?

UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATE CLAIM
State falsely claims use of word “physician” in 89 IAC 140.413 negates definition of
“physician services”, which includes incident services by physician’s employees as defined in 89 IAC 140.400(a), 89 IAC 140.411

State falsely claims that federal law does not apply and statutory construction rules don’t apply
Judge Alonso previously illegally ruled that the Federal Medicaid Code does not apply in this case despite the fact the Illinois Medicaid is a joint federal/state program partially funded by the Federal Medicaid Code!

IAC TOO VAGUE
•Criminal Laws are invalid if too vague to understand (“void for vagueness doctrine”)
•Illinois Administrative Code too vague in sections:
89 IAC 140.12,
89 IAC 140.400,
89 IAC 140.411, and
89 IAC 140.413
Illinois Administrative Code
•Why should 89 IAC 140.413 have more weight than 89 IAC 140.12?
•Why should the definitions of physician services in and 140.411 not apply to the term “physician” in 89 IAC 140.413?

STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION RULES REQUIRE (Regarding interpretation of conflictin State Statutes)
Specific Controls over General
•89 IAC 140.400 & 89 IAC 140.411
more specific “physician services” includes non-physician employee services
•89 IAC 140.413 general word “physician” with no definition of what services this includes cannot by exclusion negate previous more specific definition of services provided by physician

Federal Law Rules
42 CFR 414.34
Services by Physician’s staff are billed as IF the Physician Performed the Services Himself

If State and Federal Law conflicts, Federal Law Rules
Due to the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution

FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES PAYMENT FOR EPSDT SERVICES
•The Federal Medicaid Code requires that State Medicaid programs pay for periodic mental health screening and treatment of any defects in mental health for children under 21:
• 42 USC 1396d “Definitions For purposes of this chapter
• (r) Early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and treatment services

•The term ‘early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and treatment services’ means the following items and services:
• (1) Screening services –
• (A) which are provided –
•(ii) at such other intervals, indicated as medically necessary, to determine the existence of certain physical and mental illnesses or conditions;
• . . .
•(5) Such other necessary health care, diagnostic services, treatment, and other measures described in subsection (a) of this section to correct or ameliorate defects and physical and mental illnesses and conditions discovered by the screening services, whether or not such services are covered under the State plan.”

STATE LAW REQUIRES PAYMENT FOR EPSDT SERVICES
•89 IAC 140.485 states:
•“Healthy Kids Program
•Program Description
–The Healthy Kids Program is the Early and Periodic Screening Diagnostic and Treatment Program [EPSDT] mandated by the Social Security Act (see 42 U.S.C. 1396a(43), 1396d(4)(B)(Supp. 1987)). The goals of the program are to:
•Improve the health status of Medicaid-eligible children ages birth through 20 years through the provision of preventive medical care and early diagnosis and treatment of conditions threatening the child’s health
•…
•8) Treatment. The Department shall pay for necessary medical care (see Section 140.2), diagnostic services [i.e. psychological testing], treatment or other measures medically necessary … to correct or ameliorate defects, physical or mental illnesses….”,
•The Illinois Public Aid Code [AKA Medicaid Act], 305 ILCS 5/19(f) requires that EPSDT screening and mental health treatment be provided to children in the Medicaid program:
•“5/19. Healthy Kids Program
•(f) Covered Medical Services. The Illinois Department shall provide coverage for all necessary health care, diagnostic services, treatment and other measures to correct or ameliorate defects, physical and mental illnesses, and conditions whether discovered by screening services or not for all children eligible for Medical Assistance under Article V of this Code.”

Dr Shelton was a Medicaid Registered EPSTD Provider

Therefore ANY REASONABLE person would conclude that the law permits substitute billing for mental health services whether it be another physician covering for the doctor, or a non-physician supervised by the doctor or her colleagues. If you don’t agree than the void for vagueness doctrine should clearly negate and prevent any criminal charges for substitute billing.

I am innocent and destroyed. I was found not guilty by jury verdict on February 24, 2009, but I have still suffered a civil death of defamation and loss of career due to this illegal attack on me by corrupt IL Atty Gen Madigan, corrupt State Police Medicaid Fraud Control Unit Investigator William Reibel, and incompetent, arrogant, malicious judges Kathleen Pantle and Jorge Luis Alonso. This is my reward for devoting my life to service particularly of the poor and needy. If you want to help reverse this civil death and obtain mental health care for those on Mediciad, contact the Illinois Reform Committee and flood them with letters. Contact the U.S. Attorney and FBI and flood them with letters. Contact your legislators and Congressmen and flood them with letters asking for congressional and legislative hearings. Contact the press. Donate to my legal fund anything possible to help reduce the more than $40,000 debt. I need tens of thousands of dollars. Shelton Legal Fund, C/O Albukerk & Associates, 3025 W. 26th St. 2nd Floor, Chicago, IL 60623. Thank you if you help.

Some Judges Should be IMPEACHED!

leave a comment »


Judges should be impeached when their conduct so intentionally impeads justice and so intentionally violates the Bill of Rights that they bring great disgrace upon the courts and cause great injustice. These impeachable acts are not just a mistake of law, or a judicial error, but rise to the level of intentional, disgraceful, illegal, unconstitutional, acts of harassment, retaliation, bullying, obstruction of justice, and aiding and abetting felony misconduct of prosecutors. These acts have caused great harm to their victims.  

I propose that articles of impeachment  should be brought against the following judges for the following reasons:

Dishonorable Judge Kathleen Pantle:

Dishon. Judge Pantle purposely violates the Constitution and the laws of both the United States and the country:

1. She issues excessive and unconstitutional bail orders out of spite, animosity, arrogance, narcissism, and deceit, even without a formal charge or due process.

On June 15, 2005 she raised my bail on a fraudulent Medicaid vendor fraud charge, upon a motion from the State for violation of bail, from a $10,000 personal recognizance bail to a $100,000 D-Bond (requires 10% payment) despite the fact she had declared me indigent, I am disabled, I had no criminal record, and I care for an elderly disabled father.  I had been jailed wrongfully by Pantle for contempt because I told her she was violating the law and had no jurisdiction in this void case, then politely attempted to walk out of the courtroom to preserve this issue for appeal, particularly because she had sue sponte removed me as pro se counsel and then denied me appointment of a public defender. During incarceration I was attacked by Sgt. Anthony Salemi, who falsified his record and said I attacked him from my wheelchair.

On December 14, 2005 in the same case Dishon. Judge Pantle arrested me executing her arrest warrant illegally issued on December 8, 2005, despite me informing her in writing on December 7, 2005 that I could not come to a court hearing on December 8, 2005 because Federal Judge Filip had scheduled my Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus on this criminal contempt case to be heard on that morning, and even told me prior to the hearing informally through his courtroom deputy that another judge would not arrest someone for not appearing as long as they were given notice there was another court hearing. Judge Filip denied my petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies. This Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus has now been refiled and is pending before Federal Judge Coar.   I had been illegally removed as pro se counsel (self-representation), although declared indigent denied a public defender for 7 months, denied a due  process hearing on her statement that she was jailing me because I failed to show up for hearing on December 8, 2005 and because I refused to answer questions at a fitness exam she had ordered although I showed up. It is actually a statutory right for me to refuse to answer questions. I did so in exercising this right because I am adamant that her orders are illegal and without jurisdiction – void ab initio. I refuse to bow to despots. The statute, 725 ILCS 5/104-13, even states that bail may NOT BE REVOKED to accomplish a fitness exam. Her order for a fitness exam was without legal basis – she only said my behavior in court (vigorously defending myself pro se by questioning her lack of  jurisdiction) and my copious pleadings (soon to be posted on the web motions to dismiss the case for lack of personal or subject matter jurisdiction) suggested a mental unfitness. This statement is NOT a legally sufficient allegation in open court that would justify a fitness exam.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/9694342/Shelton-Federal-Habeas-PetitionCriminal-Contempt-Conviction2008

On January 6, 2006 after the Illinois Appellate Court freed me on December 30, 2005 and reduced bail from “no bail” to $10,000 personal recognizance bail, Dishon. Judge Pantle falsely stated on the record, without me in the courtroom and without benefit of counsel that I had lied to the IL Appellate Court to obtain release and then she raised the bail from $10,000 personal recognizance bail to $500,000 D-Bond (10$ cash required to get out). The IL Appellate Court again freed me 2 weeks later, overturning her order.

2. She committed felony conspiracy to violate rights under color of law in conspiring with Bill Bradley, IL State Police Investigator William Reibel, Patrick Keenan, Nicholas Cozzolino, John Fearon, Patrick Murphy, and Judges Kathleen Pantle, Jorge Alonso, and Lon Schultz, as well as other unnamed or unknown individuals to intentionally retaliating against those who are whistle blowers against government corruption in Illinois and Cook County in that she conspired to illegally prosecute providers of mental health services to those on Medicaid so as to deny care for mental health services to those on Medicaid – this is a gross violation of her oath of office in that prosecutions without personal or subject-matter jurisdiction are forbidden;

3. She committed felony violation of civil rights under color of law as above;

4.  She committed the act of aiding and abetting felony subornation of perjury by the employees of the IL Attorney General’s Office by failing to hold hearings on my motion to dismiss for fraud upon the grand jury, including the acts by State Police Inv. Reibel in making false statements to the grand juries that indicted Dr. Shelton and Mr. Glass, including false statements about the law and about evidence;

5. She violating her oath of office in allowing the void prosecution of Dr. Shelton and Mr. Glass for Medicaid Vendor Fraud without jurisdiction and in violation of the United States Federal Medicaid Code and the Constitution’s Supremecy Clause, as well as prosecuting these persons when she had evidence they were not guilty of the alleged acts;

6. She committed malicious prosecution against Dr. Shelton and Mr. Glass in that all these persons were whistle blowers against corruption in Illinois government and these fraudulent and malicious prosecutions amounted to retaliation for exposing the criminal conduct of members of the Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, as well as officials in the City of Chicago, County of Cook, and State of Illinois;

7. She was aiding and abetting the felony violaton of civil rights under color of law by AAGs Fearon, Murray who were and are still grossly violating due process in not only prosecuting these persons without subject matter or personal jurisdiction, but also in doing so in a process indicative of gross prosecutorial misconduct in violating many rights required by due process under the Constitution;

8. She committed the felony federal crime of slavery concerning Dr. Shelton in jailing her without legal process in violation of the 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution;

9. She violated her oath of office and snubbed her nose at the Constitution in stating in open court in answer to my concerns about her lack of jurisdiction, “I don’t care,” in open defiance of the rules of law;

10. She gave false information to Judge Alonso , who had taken over the case against me when Judge Pantle was transferred out of the criminal court to the Chancery Division, while in the judge’s chambers behind the bench on April 13, 2007, so that Judge Alonso would again illegally hold me in contempt and summarily jail me – Judge Pantle was “visiting” the courtroom to finish up a few cases and hid herself in Judge Alonso’s chambers during one of my void pre-trial hearings – Judge Alonso, falsely thinking that Judge Pantle understood pro se and contempt issues BLINDLY followed her suggestions and procedures thereby also illegally finding me in contempt in an act of not just judicial stupidity, but also in an unconstitutional act;

11. She committed court ordered elder neglect, in a heartless and unethical act, by not considering my father’s situation and not allowing me to arrange for the care of my disabled father whenever she took me into custody- during May to June 2005 he lost 20 lbs and I found him at home dehydrated and depressed;

12. She ignored the well being and health of a defendant, as well as denied due process, by continuing hearings when I was substantially impaired by an asthma attack and/or dehydration and medical neglect – Cook County Jail staff had withheld my heart and lung medication;

***further details to be added to this post – work in preparation***

I call upon the Illinois House to investigate this matter and consider articles of impeachment. I call upon Chief Judge Evans to remove this incompetent, arrogant, dangerous, witch from the bench before others are harmed.

It is criminal in my opinion that she is now a bond judge in the main criminal court building concerning the most serious felonies in Cook County. Presiding Criminal Court Judge Biebel should be ashamed that he has appointed her to such an important task.

Illegal Political Trials (Hits) – Alive and Well in Illinois

leave a comment »


Protecting Defendants Charged for Political Reasons

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE DOUGLAS IN 1970 – “Does the answer to the problem of political trials involve defining the procedure for conducting political trials or does it involve the designing of constitutional methods for putting an end to them? . . . . It will be time enough to resolve those weighty problems when a political trial reaches this Court for review.”

THE TIME MAY BE NOW!

The State of Illinois through first Attorney General Jim Ryan and now Attorney General Lisa Madigan along with incompetent, ignorant, and/or corrupt officials in Illinois Medicaid including Bill Bradley, Investigator Reibel in the State Police, and Patrick Keenan in the State Police Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, with tacit approval by many other corrupt officials in the State of Illinois, have perpetrated a scheme for ten years to deny mental health services for persons on Medicaid in violation of the Federal Medicaid Code. See my other posts on Medicaid at:
http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com/2008/10/criminal-scheme-of-il-attorney-general.html.

In order to falsely advertise that she is “tough on fraud” so that she can advance her personal political ambitions, Lisa Madigan continues to fraudulently and without legal authorization indict outstanding providers of mental health services to Medicaid patients. Judges Schultz, Fox, Pantle, Alonso, and others have participated in these void and illegal prosecutions and done great harm to the citizens of Illinois in their illegal acts of violation the United States Constitution, in aiding and abetting this violation of federal law and civil rights.

I have been one of the persons illegally indicted and defamed, presently awaiting trial over a period of four long years. The harm to me, my patients, and my family is immeasurable and painful. I have persistly legally and appropriately through the legal process of at first representing myself and filing scholarly motions proving that higher court precedence (stare decisis) does NOT PERMIT this kind of persecution for political gain, and that my case is null and void ab initio (from the start).

I have been punished for vigorously advocating for my constitutional rights to redress of grievances and due process (including the right not to be tried for something that is not a crime) for four years with four incarcerations for contempt (two thrown out by the Illinois Appellate Court – pepetrated by Dishonorable Judge Pantle), one presently before Hon. Judge Coar in federal district court on a habeas corpus petition (asking the court to vacate and expunge the conviction on the basis of violation of constitutional rights and voidness – pepetrated by Dishonorable Judge Pantle), and one in limbo – dismissed for want of prosecution, but potentially can reinvigorate the appeal later (perpetrated by Dishonorable Judge Alonso).

I have been beaten, tortured, and medically neglected during these incarcerations and when I protested, a correctional officer, Sgt. Anthony Salemi, came into my cell and committed assault and battery against me. He falsified his records and I was charged and convicted of aggravated battery to an officer for allegedly “ramming him with my wheelchair” causing a skinned shin, and “kicking him in the chest with my RIGHT leg” causing soreness. This was impossible for me to do do to a partial RIGHT hemiparesis and extreme weakness secondary to dehydration caused by mendical neglect. I was sentenced to two years despite no criminal record and was released from Dwight penitentiary after being tortured on March 31, 2008. I was punished and placed in solitary confinement for 6 months because I refused to walk (I was unable to due to my disability) and forced to swim in my diarrhea on a 2 inch mattress with no sheets or clothes for days, except for a roughly quilted velcro smock and blanket, without toilet paper, without water (I was too week to get myself up to the water fountain at the sink or the toilet). The United States Attorney has been informed and so far has done NOTHING! My weight dropped from 171 lbs to 127 lbs and by the time I was released I couldn’t even sit up because of severe dehydration, and electrolyte imbalance. I was immediately taken to an emergency room and treated. The incompetent and barbaric sadists and psychopaths in Dwight’s medical department had insisted I was faking my medical problems.

Due to my protests, all reasonable and responsible and polite, I have been illegally and immoraly denied self-representation by Judges Pantle and now Alonso without legal authority in violation of my constitutional rights. I am being prosecuted for political reasons as a whistle blower. I testified against now convict and ex-Governor George Ryan in a class action suit for illegally denying 73 million dollars in funds for the care of handicapped children. I have won suits against Sheriff Sheahan in C[r]ook County for violating the American with Disabilities Act. I have won suits against the State of Illinois for failing to investigate barbaric and illegal abuse of mental health patients/inmates at Cook County Jail, and I have numerous pro se civil rights, mandamus, and injuctive suits pending in federal and state court against these corrupt officials. I am a target of the corrupt cabal in Illinois and C[r]ook County.

Justice Douglas in Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S.337 wrote the following in a concurring opinion, which is very much on point. My case is ripe for Hon. Juge Coar to address in this manner in the federal district court. It is a political case! This quote, by Justice Douglas in his opinion, about Penn is fascinating and you everyone should enjoy it!.

HOWEVER IT IS SAD THAT IN THE 21ST CENTURY IN ILLINOIS, CITIZENS WHO ARE DOING NOTHING BUT PROVIDING MUCH NEEDED MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES TO THE NEEDY, WHO HAVE DEVOTED THEIR LIVES TO SERVICE, AND WHO VALUE OUR CONSTITUTION, ARE STILL THE TARGET OF POLITICAL ATTACKS IN A MOST VICIOUS AND BRUTAL MANNER!

THIS IS WHY I ASK FOR THE HELP OF THE PUBLIC TO FUND MY DEFENSE AND TO HELP ME CONTINUE TO HELP OTHERS DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION. See link at the right on this blog if you wish to help.
________________________________________________________________________
QUOTED FROM CONCURRING OPINTION BY JUSTICE DOUGLAS IN ILLINOIS V. ALLEN, 397 U.S. 337 (1970):

Our real problems of this type lie not with this case, but with other kinds of trials. First are the political trials. They frequently recur in our history, [Footnote 2/2] and, insofar as they take place in federal courts, we have broad supervisory powers over them. That is one setting where the question arises whether the accused has rights of confrontation that the law invades at its peril.

In Anglo-American law, great injustices have at times been done to unpopular minorities by judges, as well as by prosecutors. I refer to London in 1670, when William Penn, the gentle Quaker, was tried for causing a riot when all that he did was to preach a sermon on Grace Church Street, his church having been closed under the Conventicle Act:

“Penn. I affirm I have broken no law, nor am I Guilty of the indictment that is laid to my charge, and to the end the bench, the jury, and myself, with these that hear us, may have a more direct understanding of this procedure, I desire you would let me know by what law it is you prosecute me, and upon what law you ground my indictment.”

“Rec. Upon the common law.”

“Penn. Where is that common law?”

“Rec. You must not think that I am able to run up so many years, and over so many adjudged cases, which we call common law, to answer your curiosity.”

“Penn. This answer I am sure is very short of my question, for if it be common, it should not be so hard to produce.”

“Rec. Sir, will you plead to your indictment?”

“Penn. Shall I plead to an Indictment that hath no foundation in law? If it contain that law you say I have broken, why should you decline to produce that law, since it will be impossible for the jury to determine, or agree to bring in their verdict, who have not the law produced by which they should measure the truth of this indictment, and the guilt, or contrary of my fact? ”

“Rec. You are a saucy fellow; speak to the Indictment.”

“Penn. I say, it is my place to speak to matter of law; I am arraigned a prisoner; my liberty, which is next to life itself, is now concerned: you are many mouths and ears against me, and if I must not be allowed to make the best of my case, it is hard, I say again, unless you shew me, and the people, the law you ground your indictment upon, I shall take it for granted your proceedings are merely arbitrary.”

“Rec. The question is whether you are Guilty of this Indictment?”

“Penn. The question is not whether I am Guilty of this Indictment, but whether this Indictment be legal. It is too general and imperfect an answer, to say it is the common law unless we knew both where and what it is. For where there is no law, there is no transgression, and that law which is not in being is so far from being common that it is no law at all.”

“Rec. You are an impertinent fellow, will you teach the court what law is? It is ‘Lex non scripta,’ that which many have studied 30 or 40 years to know, and would you have me to tell you in a moment?”

“Penn. Certainly, if the common law be so hard to be understood, it is far from being very common; but if the lord Coke in his Institutes be of any consideration, he tells us, That Common Law is common right, and that Common Right is the Great Charter-Privileges”

“Rec. Sir, you are a troublesome fellow, and it is not for the honour of the court to suffer you to go on. ”

“Penn. I have asked but one question, and you have not answered me; though the rights and privileges of every Englishman be concerned in it.”

“Rec. If I should suffer you to ask questions till tomorrow morning, you would be never the wiser.”

“Penn. That is according as the answers are.”

“Rec. Sir, we must not stand to hear you talk all night.”

“Penn. I design no affront to the court, but to be heard in my just plea: and I must plainly tell you that, if you will deny me Oyer of that law, which you suggest I have broken, you do at once deny me an acknowledged right, and evidence to the whole world your resolution to sacrifice the privileges of Englishmen to your sinister and arbitrary designs.”

“Rec. Take him away. My lord, if you take not some course with this pestilent fellow to stop his mouth, we shall not be able to do anything tonight.”

“Mayor. Take him away, take him away, turn him into the bale-dock. [Footnote 2/3]”

The Trial of William Penn, 3 How.St.Tr. 951, 958-959.

The panel of judges who tried William Penn were sincere, law-and-order men of their day. Though Penn was acquitted by the jury, he was jailed by the court for his contemptuous conduct. Would we tolerate removal of a defendant from the courtroom during a trial because he was insisting on his constitutional rights, albeit vociferously, no matter how obnoxious his philosophy might have been to the bench that tried him? Would we uphold contempt in that situation?

Problems of political indictments and of political judges raise profound questions going to the heart of the social compact. For that compact is two-sided: majorities undertake to press their grievances within limits of the Constitution and in accord with its procedures; minorities agree to abide by constitutional procedures in resisting those claims.

Does the answer to that problem involve defining the procedure for conducting political trials or does it involve the designing of constitutional methods for putting an end to them? This record is singularly inadequate to answer those questions. It will be time enough to resolve those weighty problems when a political trial reaches this Court for review.
_______________________________________________
[Footnote 2/2]
From Spies v. People, 122 Ill. 1, 12 N.E. 865, involving the Haymarket riot; In re Debs, 158 U. S. 564, involving the Pullman strike; Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U. S. 103, involving the copper strikes of 1917; Commonwealth v. Sacco, 255 Mass. 369, 151 N.E. 839, 259 Mass. 128, 156 N.E. 57, 261 Mass. 12, 158 N.E. 167, involving the Red scare of the 20’s; to Dennis v. United States, 341 U. S. 494, involving an agreement to teach Marxism.

As to the Haymarket riot resulting in the Spies case, see 2 J. Commons and Associates, History of Labour in the United States 386 et seq. (1918); W. Swindler, Court and Constitution in the Twentieth Century, cc. 3 and 4 (1969).

As to the Pullman strike and the Debs case, see L. Pfeffer, This Honorable Court 215-216 (1965); A. Lindsey, The Pullman Strike, cc. XII and XIII (1942); Commons, supra, at 502-508.

As to the Mooney case, see the January 18, 1922, issue of The New Republic; R. Frost, The Mooney Case (1968).

As to the Sacco-Vanzetti case, see Fraenkel, The Sacco-Vanzetti Case; F. Frankfurter, The Case of Sacco and Vanzetti (1927).

As to the repression of teaching involved in the Dennis case, see O. Kirchheimer, Political Justice 132-158 (1961).

[Footnote 2/3]
At Old Bailey, where the William Penn trial was held, the baledock (or baildock) was “a small room taken from one of the corners of the court, and left open at the top, in which, during the trials, are put some of the malefactors.”

Oxford Eng. Dict.

%d bloggers like this: