United States of America v. Sachy, et al, 5:18-cr-00048-CDL-CHW(1)
U.S. District Court, Middle District of Georgia
Mental Health Professionals
Pain Management Specialist
In 2018, Neuropsychiatrist Dr. Thomas Sachy, M.D., faced a grave legal battle in the case of United States of America v. Sachy, et al. The indictment included charges such as Conspiracy to Distribute and Dispense Controlled Substances, Unlawful Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death, Unlawful Dispensation and Distribution of Controlled Substances, Maintaining Drug Involved Premises, and Money Laundering Conspiracy. After serving three years in federal prison, Dr. Sachy sought the expertise of the White Collar Defense Healthcare Fraud Attorneys to challenge a coerced plea agreement.
After spending three years in federal prison, Dr. Sachy retained the White Collar Defense team to work on withdrawing a plea agreement that he had felt coerced into signing. As a result of the new standard decided in Ruan v. United States, Ronald W. Chapman, II and Meggan B. Sullivan walked into the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia prepared for a month-long trial.
Attorneys Ronald W. Chapman, II, and Meggan B. Sullivan mounted an unyielding defense strategy in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, meticulously challenging the Government’s case against Dr. Thomas Sachy, M.D. The defense team’s strategic maneuvers and compelling arguments included the following:
- Expert Anesthesiologist Cross-Examination: Attorney Chapman masterfully cross-examined the Government’s expert anesthesiologist, exposing a critical flaw in their case. He skillfully extracted testimony that highlighted the absence of a drug trafficking standard specifically related to opioid prescribing in Georgia. This revelation undermined the Government’s claim and cast doubt on the charges brought against Dr. Sachy.
- Exclusion of Forensic Toxicologist’s Testimony: Attorneys Chapman and Sullivan successfully objected to the introduction of the forensic toxicologist’s testimony. Their rigorous defense work revealed that the toxicologist incorrectly testified about the discovery of medication bottles near a deceased patient. By challenging the accuracy and reliability of this testimony, the defense team weakened the Government’s case and raised doubts about the credibility of their evidence.
- Objection to Toxicology Reports: Attorneys Chapman and Sullivan vehemently objected to the introduction of toxicology reports, highlighting a critical omission by the Government. They exposed the Government’s failure to secure testimony from the laboratory technician who prepared the reports. This omission raised questions about the validity and admissibility of the toxicology evidence, further undermining the Government’s position.
By employing these specific defense strategies, Attorneys Chapman and Sullivan effectively dismantled key aspects of the Government’s case, weakening the prosecution’s arguments and creating substantial doubt surrounding the charges brought against Dr. Sachy.
Beginning their anticipated three-day defense against the remaining charges. They began by calling ten witnesses, which included Dr. Sachy’s former patients and family members of deceased patients. They then utilized testimony from an addictionologist, who had performed evaluations for Dr. Sachy’s patients, to tear down the image painted by the Government that medication tolerance means addiction.
The Government advised that it lacked the toxicology foundation for the two counts of Unlawful Distribution of Controlled Substance Resulting in Death, which resulted in Judge Clay Land dismissing both counts a mere seven days into the trial. At the conclusion of the defense’s first day, the Government proposed a resolution: dismissal of Unlawful Dispensation and Distribution of Controlled Substances, Maintaining Drug Involved Premises, and Money Laundering Conspiracy; time served; and the return of seized assets totaling $1.2 million.
Area of Law:
Pain Management Criminal Defense
Unlawful Prescribing or Dispensing
Ronald W. Chapman, II, LL.M.
Meggan B. Sullivan
Disclaimer: This information is a sample of our past results. Prospective clients may not obtain the same or similar results. Every case is different and each case must be evaluated and handled on its own merits. The circumstances of your case may differ from the results provided. The information provided has not been reviewed or approved by the State Bar.