⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Sixth Circuit hears the Kouza brothers' consolidated appeals from a Michigan pharmacy fraud trial. Prosecutors accused the brothers of billing Medicare, Medicaid, and a private insurer for prescriptions that were never fully dispensed, including bills left unreversed when patients did not collect their medication. A jury convicted both brothers of conspiracy in 2024. They are challenging their criminal judgments. The evidence included pharmacy billing and inventory records, as well as testimony from people who worked at the pharmacies. A proposed defense witness declined to testify after prosecutors raised concerns about his possible criminal exposure. The brothers will argue that this improperly disrupted their defense; the government will dispute that account. The Fifth Amendment protects against compelled self-incriminating testimony: answers that could expose the witness to criminal liability. The judges will also discuss plain-error review, a demanding standard for correcting an error that was not properly raised in the trial court. Later, the argument turns to a sentencing increase based on managerial responsibility, and to forfeiture: court-ordered surrender of money or property derived from the crime. The questions include how extensive the activity was, and whether the forfeiture amount violates the constitutional ban on excessive fines.

United States v. Raad and Ramis Kouza (No. 25-2094) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, argued October 20, 2026.