United States v. Blecker
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
657 F.2d 629 (1981)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
The General Services Administration (GSA) awarded Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) a contract to provide federal agencies with computer and data-processing services. The contract permitted CSC to subcontract for consulting services to be paid at rates based upon the consultants’ education and experience. Blecker (defendant) was president of Icarus Corporation (defendant). When Icarus became a subcontractor for CSC, Blecker was given a copy of CSC’s contract with the GSA and told that rates were set based on specific education and experience requirements. Blecker instructed his employees to add education and experience to their resumes and embellished some resumes without the employees’ knowledge. The false resumes were transmitted to CSC offices and then hand-delivered to the GSA office. To obtain payment, Icarus submitted invoices to CSC, and CSC prepared and hand-delivered bills to the GSA office. Icarus and Blecker were indicted for presenting false claims to an agency of the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 287 and convicted after trial. On appeal, Icarus and Blecker argued that the court erred in excluding as irrelevant any testimony about the value of Icarus’s services and in instructing the jury that a conviction could be based on the submission of false invoices to the GSA through an intermediary.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Phillips, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.