United States v. Semrau
693 F.3d 510 (2012)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403, expert testimony based on novel scientific evidence, such as fMRI lie detection, is inadmissible in a criminal trial if its reliability and error rates have not been established in real-world settings and its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of confusing the issues or misleading the jury.
Facts:
- Dr. Lome Semrau owned and operated companies that provided psychiatric care to nursing home patients and billed Medicare and Medicaid using standardized Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes.
- A psychiatrist contracted by Semrau, Dr. Roy Barnes, typically spent six to eight minutes with patients and recorded his services under CPT code 90862.
- In late 2002, a Medicare contractor, CIGNA, audited Semrau's Tennessee operations and concluded his company was engaging in 'upcoding' by billing for a more complex and expensive service (90862) than was actually performed.
- Following the audit, Semrau's company began billing a lower-paying code (99311) in Tennessee but continued to bill the higher code 90862 in Mississippi for identical services.
- On July 1, 2003, after Medicare reduced the reimbursement rate for code 90862 in Mississippi, Semrau's company began billing an even higher-paying code, 99312, for the same services.
- On August 8, 2003, Dr. Semrau instructed his billing staff to bill all services that doctors had marked as 90862 under the higher-paying 99312 code instead.
- This practice of changing the codes continued until four days after Dr. Semrau and his companies were served with a grand jury subpoena on December 17, 2004.
Procedural Posture:
- A federal grand jury returned an indictment against Dr. Semrau, later superseded, for healthcare fraud and money laundering.
- The United States prosecuted Dr. Semrau in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee.
- Prior to trial, the defense moved to admit expert testimony on the results of an fMRI lie detection test administered to Dr. Semrau.
- A magistrate judge held a Daubert hearing and recommended excluding the fMRI evidence under FRE 702 and FRE 403.
- The district court adopted the magistrate's report and recommendation, excluding the expert testimony.
- A jury convicted Dr. Semrau of three counts of healthcare fraud.
- Dr. Semrau (appellant) appealed his conviction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, and the United States (appellee) responded.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a district court abuse its discretion by excluding expert testimony based on fMRI lie detection technology under Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 403 when the technology's error rates in real-world settings are unknown and its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of jury confusion?
Opinions:
Majority - Stranch, J.
No. A district court does not abuse its discretion by excluding fMRI lie detection evidence because the technology is not yet sufficiently reliable for courtroom use. The court reasoned that the evidence failed under both Rule 702 and Rule 403. Under the Rule 702 Daubert analysis, the court found fMRI technology's reliability is unproven outside of controlled laboratory settings. Critically, there are no known error rates for its application in 'real-world' situations involving high-stakes deception, and the testing administered to Dr. Semrau deviated from established laboratory protocols (e.g., his age, and the re-testing after a 'deceptive' result). Independently, the court found the evidence inadmissible under Rule 403, as its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of misleading the jury. The 'aura of infallibility' surrounding scientific evidence could cause jurors to abdicate their duty to assess credibility. Furthermore, the test results only spoke to Dr. Semrau's 'general' truthfulness and could not corroborate his testimony about any specific criminal act.
Analysis:
This case is a landmark decision as the first federal appellate court ruling on the admissibility of fMRI lie detection evidence. The holding establishes a significant hurdle for the admission of novel neuroscientific evidence, emphasizing the crucial difference between validity in controlled laboratory studies and reliability in real-world forensic applications. By grounding its decision in both FRE 702 (Daubert) and the Rule 403 balancing test, the court created two independent and formidable barriers for evidence that purports to measure credibility, a core function of the jury. This precedent will heavily influence future litigation involving emerging technologies, requiring proponents to demonstrate not just scientific theory but also practical, real-world reliability and error rates.
Unlock the full brief for United States v. Semrau