## Facts

- Postal inspectors ran an undercover operation designed to detect insurance fraud involving physicians by staging two fictitious automobile-accident scenarios.
- Inspectors used assumed names to obtain driver’s licenses, registered and insured vehicles under those names, and worked with local police to create accident reports for collisions that did not occur.
- In each scenario, an officer issued a traffic citation to an inspector, and the inspector appeared in municipal court and pleaded guilty; the prosecutors and judges were unaware the matters were shams.
- In the first staged accident, postal inspectors posed as passengers and visited Dr. John Gamble, a physician in Kansas City, Kansas, requesting help in obtaining money from an insurer despite having no injuries.
- Over multiple office visits, Gamble performed routine examinations, completed or supported documentation implying accident-related injuries, and discussed how claims could be framed to obtain insurance payment, including suggesting neck/back complaints because they are difficult to disprove.
- Insurance claim forms and related materials were mailed in the ordinary processing of the claim, resulting in payment of medical expenses tied to Gamble’s treatment and records.
- Gamble was charged and convicted in federal district court on four counts of mail fraud, each tied to a separate mailing in furtherance of the scheme.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Gamble knowingly participated in a scheme to defraud and caused the use of the mails for purposes of executing the scheme under 18 U.S.C. § 1341.
2. Whether the government’s undercover tactics were so outrageous that due process required dismissal, or that dismissal was warranted under the court’s supervisory power.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed Gamble’s convictions on four counts of mail fraud.
- The court held the evidence supported findings that Gamble had specific intent to defraud and knowingly furthered a fraudulent insurance-claim plan.
- The court held that use of the mails was reasonably foreseeable in the insurance claims process and thus attributable to Gamble for § 1341 purposes.
- The court rejected dismissal based on “outrageous government conduct,” concluding the investigation did not meet the high threshold for a due process violation.
- The court declined to invoke supervisory power to overturn the convictions.

## Legal Principles

- Mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 requires proof of (1) a scheme to defraud and (2) use of the mails for the purpose of executing the scheme.
- A “scheme” element may be satisfied even if government agents initiated or designed the overall plan, so long as the defendant knowingly joined it with specific intent to defraud.
- The mailing element is satisfied when mail use is reasonably foreseeable in the ordinary course of the relevant business transaction and is part of executing the fraudulent plan.
- A due process defense based on outrageous government conduct is available only in exceptional circumstances; mere provision of an opportunity to commit crime, without coercion or implantation of criminal intent, generally does not bar prosecution.
- Appellate supervisory power to dismiss charges is reserved for extreme situations and is not a substitute for the stringent due process standard when the defendant’s voluntary criminal participation is proved.

## Conclusion

The court upheld Gamble’s mail fraud convictions because the trial evidence supported findings that he knowingly assisted an insurance fraud scheme and that mailings were a foreseeable part of executing it, and because the government’s extensive undercover fabrication—though troubling—did not reach the level of outrageousness required to bar prosecution or justify dismissal under supervisory authority.


United States v. Gamble, 737 F.2d 853 (10th Cir. 1984)