Due to the lapse in appropriations, Department of Justice websites will not be regularly updated. The Department’s essential law enforcement and national security functions will continue. Please refer to the Department of Justice’s contingency plan for more information.

You are here

Justice News

Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Middle District of Pennsylvania

Friday, November 14, 2014

Mt. Carmel Psychiatrist Charged With Health Care Fraud

The United States Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, announced today that charges have been filed against Andrew Newton, a resident of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. 

According to United States Attorney, Peter Smith, Dr. Andrew Newton, age 42, a psychiatrist with an office in Mt. Carmel is charged in a six-count Information with false billings for psychotherapy services.  Specifically, it is alleged that between August 2010, and November 2011, Newton billed Medicare for face-to-face therapy sessions when he was in fact out of the country.

The government also filed a plea agreement in the case which is subject to approval of the Court. 
The investigation was conducted by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Inspector General, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation – Williamsport office.  Assistant United States Attorney Wayne P. Samuelson is assigned to prosecute the case.

Indictments Criminal Informations are only allegations.  All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.

A sentence following a finding of guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statues and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

In this case, the maximum penalty under the federal statutes is six years imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine.  Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public and provide for the defendant’s educational, vocational and medical needs.  For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant. 

Updated April 9, 2015