Theft and Fraud  |  1st Dist.

People v. Thomas, 2025 IL App (1st) 232035 (November 17, 2025) 5th Div./Cook Co. (MIKVA) Affirmed in part, reversed in part, remanded.
Defendant, the co-owner of a medical supply company, was accused of fraudulent Medicaid billing and after a bench trial was found guilty of theft based on the exertion of unauthorized control over the property of another, theft based on deception, and vendor fraud. The trial court merged the vendor fraud count into the theft by deception count and imposed concurrent prison terms of six years for theft by unauthorized control and six years for theft by deception. On appeal, defendant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and argued that one of two theft convictions should be vacated under the one-act, one-crime doctrine. The appellate court affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded to the trial court to determine which of each defendant's two convictions, which the parties agreed were for the same criminal act, should stand, and to reduce the remaining conviction to a Class 1 felony because the State failed to prove the theft of governmental property

In the case of *People v. Thomas*, the court issued a decision on November 17, 2025, regarding theft and fraud charges against a co-owner of a medical supply company accused of scamming Medicaid. After a bench trial, the defendant was found guilty of stealing by taking control of someone else's property, stealing through deception, and vendor fraud. The trial court combined the vendor fraud charge with the theft by deception charge, handing down six-year prison sentences for both types of theft.

On appeal, the defendant argued that the evidence wasn't strong enough and that one of the theft convictions should be thrown out because they were based on the same act. The appellate court agreed with some parts of the appeal, reversing some of the decisions and sending the case back to the trial court. They instructed the court to decide which of the two theft convictions should stick and to downgrade the other one to a Class 1 felony since the State didn't prove that the theft involved government property.