Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D, a medical doctor, was named in 58 counts of a 111 count indictment charging him and his medical partner, Dr. Tejinder Uppal, with various crimes. P's theory at trial was that Drs. Johnson and Uppal, who ran the Neighborhood Health Clinic, were engaged in the distribution of controlled substances and illegal medical billing practices. To prove the distribution charges, P presented testimony from several witnesses, including former employees and 'patients' of the Clinic, and an undercover Michigan state police officer who investigated the Clinic. At trial, a former employee of the Clinic, Tina Chapman, testified that pharmacies would telephone the Clinic about prescriptions written by D. Chapman testified that she told Dr. Uppal of these phone calls, that they made Dr. Uppal 'extremely mad,' and that Dr. Uppal stated that she 'would speak with Dr. Johnson about it.' Chapman further testified that on one occasion she heard Dr. Uppal tell defendant over the telephone that 'he was going to have to stop writing prescriptions like that.' D objected on hearsay grounds. The court overruled the objection. Ds were convicted and appealed this ruling in part.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.