United States v. Mitchell J. Stein
Court Docket Number: 9:11-cr-80205-KAM
This case is assigned to Judge Kenneth A. Marra, U.S. District Court Judge for the Southern District of Florida, Paul G. Rogers Federal Building, 701 Clematis Street, Courtroom 4, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401.
INDICTMENT: On December 13, 2011, Mitchell J. Stein, an attorney for Signalife, Inc. (Signalife), was indicted on charges of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, wire fraud, securities fraud, money laundering, and conspiracy to obstruct justice for engaging in a multimillion-dollar market manipulation scheme related to Signalife. Signalife, a South Carolina health care device company was later known as Heart Tronics, Inc., purportedly sold electronic heart monitoring devices. The company's stock was traded under the symbols SGN and HRTT
CONVICTION: On May 20, 2013, after a two week jury trial, a jury convicted Stein, on all charges in the indictment
SENTENCE: A sentencing for Stein occurred on December 4, 2014 and December 5, 2014. The court sentenced Stein to 204 months of incarceration, followed by 2 years of supervised release, and ordered him to forfeit $5,378,581.61. At this hearing, the Court cancelled the restitution hearing that had been scheduled for February 27, 2015;
RESTITUTION: On April 8, 2015, the Court ordered Stein to pay restitution in the amount of $13,186,025.85 to the 2,415 victims that have been identified by the U.S. Probation Office. In view of Steins present indigence, the Court ordered Stein to pay a minimal amount per month toward satisfaction of the restitution amount, specifically, 50% of his prison wages (if any) or $25 per quarter while he is incarcerated, and 10% of his monthly gross earnings after he is released. Those monthly payment amounts may be modified at a subsequent time based on any changes in Stein's financial circumstances.
It is important for you to know that just because the Court ordered the defendant to make restitution in this case does not mean that the defendant is financially capable of making restitution at this time. In the event that sufficient restitution payments are received from the defendant, the funds will be distributed by the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
APPEAL: Stein appealed his convictions and sentencing, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard oral argument on July 12, 2016 at 9:00 am in the 12th Floor Courtroom, James Lawrence King Federal Building, 99 N.E. 4th Street, Miami, Florida 33132.
UPDATE: On January 18, 2017, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the convictions of Stein on one count of conspiracy to commit mail and wire fraud, three counts of mail fraud, three counts of wire fraud, three counts of securities fraud, three counts of money laundering, and one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice. However, the court vacated Stein’s 204-month sentence and $13 million restitution order and remanded for resentencing, finding that the district court erred in calculating actual loss.
The district court will re-sentence Stein at a date to be determined.
Related Cases: In a related case in the Central District of California, United States v. Ajay K. Anand, a former investor in and consultant for Signalife, was sentenced to one year of probation. Anand pleaded guilty to one count of obstruction of proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) stemming from his making false and misleading statements about his knowledge of and involvement in certain activities of Signalife. Also, in another related case pending in the District of Columbia, United States v. Martin B. Carter, Carter, the former Chief Technology Officer of Heart Tronics, Inc., was sentenced to time served and 36 months of supervised release. Carter pleaded guilty on October 5, 2011 for his role in the fraudulent scheme.
The information on this webpage will be updated as new developments arise in the case. If you have any questions, please contact the Victim Assistance Unit by calling toll-free at (888) 549-3945 or by emailing us at email@example.com.
Crime Victim Rights: Under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, Title 18, United States Code, Section 3771, a crime victim has the following rights: (1) the right to be reasonably protected from the accused; (2) the right to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of any public court proceeding, or any parole proceeding, involving the crime or of any release or escape of the accused; (3) the right not to be excluded from any such public court proceeding, unless the court, after receiving clear and convincing evidence, determines that testimony by the victim would be materially altered if the victim heard other testimony at that proceeding; (4) the right to be reasonably heard at any public proceeding in the district court involving release, plea, sentencing, or any parole proceeding; (5) the reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government in the case; (6) the right to full and timely restitution as provided in law; (7) the right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay; and (8) the right to be treated with fairness and with respect for the victim's dignity and privacy; (9) the right to be informed in a timely manner of any plea bargain or deferred prosecution agreement; and (10) the right to be informed of the rights under this section and the services described in section 503(c) of the Victims' Rights and Restitution Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 10607(c)) and provided contact information for the Office of the Victims’ Rights Ombudsman of the Department of Justice.
Office of the Victims’ Rights Ombudsman of the Department of Justice Contact Information:
Marie A. O’Rourke
Victims’ Rights Ombudsman
Email: usaeo.VictimOmbudsman@usdoj.gov (Victims’ Rights Ombudsman)
Executive Office for United States Attorneys
Department of Justice
RFK Main Justice Building
950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Room 2261
Washington, DC 20530-0001
Section 377I(c)(2) requires that we advise you that you have the right to retain counsel. Although the statute specifically sets forth your right to seek advice of an attorney with regard to your rights under the statute, there is no requirement that you retain counsel. The Government may not recommend any specific counsel, nor can the Government (or the Court) pay for counsel to represent you. Government attorneys represent the United States.