Skip to main content

No. 25-7628October Term 2025Petition Pending

Docket 25-7628October Term 2025 (2025–2026)

Oliver Jenkins and Sherry-Ann Jenkins, Petitioners v. United States

Oliver Jenkins and Sherry-Ann Jenkins ask the Supreme Court to review the use of a deliberate-ignorance instruction in their health-care fraud and conspiracy case.

Case status

Current stage
Petition Pending
Latest event
Petition pending
Decision timing
No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.
Petition PendingNot granted
ArgumentsNot scheduled
Decision ReleasedNot scheduled
What it's about

Oliver Jenkins and Sherry-Ann Jenkins ask the Supreme Court to review the use of a deliberate-ignorance instruction in their health-care fraud and conspiracy case. They argue that the instruction was improper because they say they acted under written directions and billing authorizations from their institution’s compliance and risk-management director.

Question presented

Whether the deliberate-ignorance doctrine may supersede the mens rea (willful knowledge) element for criminal intent in healthcare fraud and conspiracy offenses when the defendant acted throughout the entire alleged cr imin al period at the direction of and in reliance upon written authorizations from the designated institutional compliance and risk management director — who identified the legal and compliance guardrails, directed that services be billed as physician services under specific CPT codes, and installed the EMR computer credentials enabling the challenged services — a scenario structurally incompatible with the willful blindness the doctrine is designed to address?

Case path

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit / Petition pending

Area

Petition for review pending

Briefing

What it's about

Oliver and Sherry-Ann Jenkins ask the Supreme Court to review the use of a deliberate-ignorance instruction in their health-care fraud and conspiracy case. They say they followed written billing and compliance directions from their institution's compliance and risk-management director.

Argument

The case has not been scheduled for argument. The Jenkinses argue that deliberate ignorance should not replace proof of willful knowledge when they relied on written institutional authorizations.

Impact

The case could affect health-care workers and administrators accused of fraud after relying on internal compliance advice. For example, it could shape whether a jury may infer knowledge when a clinician used billing codes authorized by a compliance official.

What is at stake in Jenkins v. United States?

The Jenkinses challenge using deliberate ignorance to prove criminal knowledge when they say institutional compliance officials gave written billing directions.

Who could be affected by the Jenkinses' case?

Health-care workers and administrators accused of fraud could be affected when they relied on internal compliance guidance for billing practices.

When will the Supreme Court act in Jenkins v. United States?

No argument date or decision window is set. Watch for a scheduling move or action on certiorari.

Grounding

Grounding
Primary materials plus reporting.
Note
Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
Checked
Sep 3, 2026
Primary materials6
Context reporting3