United States v. Palmquist

Mark Palmquist (defendant) was a veteran who worked as a civilian with the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Palmquist filed six claims for increased service-related disability benefits for a back injury, and all were denied because he was unable to establish the injury was connected to his military service. Palmquist filed again, this time submitting a forged memorandum saying he received his back injury while in service. This was the only evidence supporting his claim. After receiving tips that Palmquist may have engaged in fraud, Timothy Bonds, an investigator for the Veterans Administration, interviewed Palmquist at Palmquist’s office. Bonds introduced himself, explained his role, and showed Palmquist his badge. Bonds told Palmquist he did not have to participate in the interview and that he could not be punished for refusing to answer questions. Before beginning the interview, Bonds gave Palmquist an Advisement of Rights form that stated Palmquist could not be fired for refusing to participate, but silence could be considered as evidence in administrative proceedings. Bonds testified that Palmquist briefly reviewed the form, Bonds summarized its contents for him, and Palmquist apparently understood and signed the form. Palmquist cooperated and was friendly during the interview. Palmquist made statements that could be interpreted as proof he knowingly and willfully submitted a false memorandum. Palmquist was indicted on numerous offenses relating to his misconduct in receiving benefits, and he pleaded guilty to two counts. Palmquist appealed the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress the statements he made to Bonds. Palmquist argued that the statements were coerced because he was forced to choose between losing his job or surrendering his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.