A woman has been charged with a felony and several misdemeanors for Food Stamp fraud allegedly committed in Juneau.
Jazmine N. Wheaton, 31, is slated to appear in Juneau Superior Court Friday to answer to a felony theft charge and three misdemeanor unsworn falsification charges.
According to charging documents, Wheaton was eligible to receive about $500 worth of Food Stamps from April 2008 to September 2009, but was overpaid about $11,600 because she concealed the fact that her husband was working and earning an income at the time.
Altogether, she received a total of $12,377 in public assistance benefits that she was not entitled to, the charging documents allege.
The discrepancy was noticed, in 2009, during a routine check by a case worker with the state Department of Health and Social Services. Criminal charges were filed in mid-January, and the case is being prosecuted by Devoron K. Hill of the Office of Special Prosecutions & Appeals in Anchorage.
Wheaton admitted concealing the information about her husband’s employment during an interview with investigators in December 2012, according to a criminal complaint filed by a DHSS investigator.
“She admitted she did not declare this income on the forms because she knew that she would get more Food Stamps by not declaring it,” the complaint alleges. “She admitted that she had signed (her husband’s) signature on the forms without his knowledge or consent.”
The complaint continued on to say, “As an applicant and recipient of Public Assistance, the Defendant had a continuing obligation to declare and report truthfully and correctly regarding household income but failed to do so. It is (Division of Public Assistance’s) standard practice to advise recipients of their program obligations both verbally and in writing as part of the application and review process and to explain that eligibility for benefits (and benefit amounts) are determined by that information.”
Wheaton did not return a phone call Tuesday seeking comment.
Second-degree theft is a class ‘C’ felony punishable by up to five years in prison and/or a $50,000 fine. Second-degree unsworn falsification, which encompasses the intention to mislead a public servant, is a class ‘A’ misdemeanor punishable up to a year in prison and/or a $10,000 fine.
Wheaton currently has two other court cases pending in Juneau: a larceny case from 2012 and a criminal mischief case from 2013.
Her attorney in one of those cases said she is currently residing in Wasilla. Court records indicate she was previously released on her own recognizance and ordered not to leave the state.
• Contact reporter Emily Russo Miller at 523-2263 or at emily.miller@juneauempire.com.
Comments (42)
Add commentHow many more?
There are over 48 million people receiving food stamps--many need them but many don't. Another Federal program that's out of control......
Trade?
The list is long of this being done, or 50 cents on the dollar trade
Years
It took over 3 years to conduct a "routine" check? Why?
@snagger
Those "out of control"' are the fraudsters. The government program is doing what it needs to with what its got. I don't claim it's perfect.....but I sure hope the program is there if I ever need to use it.
I'd prefer to NOT go to a church if I'm ever hungry (crossed fingers I won't get sick and lose my job and insurance!) I don't want to give someone my soul for a crust of bread.....
No strings attached,,,,,,,,,,
Government food, cell phones, housing, health care all free for just asking. It's the honor system no check involved. Too many people have no morals or honor. Church?
Snagger
I agree, just curious what Church has to do with it. Please don't say that Church makes people moral...
Not sure?
Just responding to what entity should help those in need.
Church certainly didn't teach my parents or me to be immoral. Or take what wasn't mine. Where's a sense of morality come from? When hungry who gets fed first and why?
Church
Mama T the churches I've attended do not ask questions when you are in need of food, clothing or whatever. You are welcome there without hassle.
anyone
getting public funds should be means tested, & yes thats includes drug testing.
This case is just the tip of the iceberg.
By GAO accounting, as much as 5% of all entitlements granting are fraudulent. Sequestration directed towards entitlements alone could save this country $50 Billion a year.
Just kidding. I made all that up!!
But I do believe that all entitlements should be on a month to month basis and require much qualifying to boot. Getting food stamps, housing, medical and legal aid should require much work and effort; just as much as a real job requires!
Not Bad
One out of 48 Million and counting. Perhaps she should be investigated on all the govt assistance she is more than likely receiving, child care/rent/welfare/Medicade/Wik and the list goes on. These programs are designed to help folks get back on their feet but instead, have turned into a "right" of so many. Not a surprise we are where we are. I say anyone taking a govt handout should pee in the bottle too! Oh wait, thats against their civil rights too....
Pull our heads out people!
mama t
why does the church or the government have to help you and your neighbors? I don't get the snark of the non believer. Please feel free to create and atheist/ agnostic charity, fundraise and help. Or just open your door. But to take pot shots at those who do what you won't?
make her pay it all back with interest
working for minimum wage cleaning up Egan Drive. After she's done with Egan Dr she could serve food at the Glory Hole. Welfare abusers are the epitome of scum.
@ $7.75/hr that's more than 1,597 hours she could spend actually doing some good for a change.
snagger, could you clarify the no strings attached comment? Free cell phones? There was a chain email going around a couple years back that insisted Obama was giving away free cell phones to welfare recipients. It turns out it was total bs. Cell phone companies have been providing free cell phones on their own for years now, before Obama was ever elected. Is this where you get your information? Chain emails from anonymous sources? Probably still a more reliable source than fox news, but only barely.
She just flipped this liberal
This was the last straw! I just took out my voter registration card, crossed off the "D" and wrote in "R."
The Applecart.....
Cheee.....This story and my world must just be one great urban myth. If you qualify for food stamps you better sign up for one of those Lifeline phones!
everybody . . .
. . . recieving the PFD should be means tested including drug test and IQ test.
And yet even with her
And yet even with her husbands income and the improper welfare money, she was probably still not much above surviving in this town...
islandhopper and SEAKDave and others.....
Of course it is frustrating when some people abuse systems in place to do business or help others. Certainly defense contractor fraud is also widespread and costs taxpayers billions, if not trillions, according to some articles.
I wonder, though - for those of you who suggest drug testing - what would you do then, with a bunch of people who are too addicted to work? I get it, we just want them to be responsible, but what if they aren't? If you follow the suggestion to it's conclusion - if they test positive, they don't get assitance, so they are on the street and hungry......then what?
Or even non-addicts getting assistance. Some of them could get jobs, sure, but probably not all - I like AKJustice's idea of having those folks do work programs or classes to do some good and learn a skill while receiving benefits (which would also take $$$, of course, for teachers and people to oversee the program and the work) but what of those who don't or can't get hired, or maybe they aren't qualified for much and every job they could get is filled?
I guess I'm just asking - I get that we'd like more people to work and contribute and get ahead - but "just cut the program and they'll sink or swim" is a reaction that doesn't seem to consider what would we all then do with a lot more starving street people who were the ones who 'sank'? Or turned to crime? (locking them up might cost even more...)
Do any of you have thoughts on this?
Swimmergirl
You raise some rather interesting points and I want to say, I in no way suggested that we kick people out on the street or starve a family trying to get by, or, cut any programs for that matter.
One of my job requirements is that I am enrolled in a random drug testing program. If I was to test positive I would be out on the street in less than thirty days, no ifs ands or buts, no second chances. Funny thing is, they would offer to clean me up prior to my release but I would still be released. All that due to a choice I make...
Would you be comfortable providing a person that made a bad choice for their own personal pleasure or enjoyment unemployment, housing assistance, food stamps, WIK, MEDICADE govt cheese or any other benifit? Basically, I should be allowed to continue the bad behavior at more less the hard working tax payers dime?
It just makes no sense to me in our current state of financial disaray that we shouldnt be placing a bit more oversight on the people that are receiving these tax payers "gifts".
We actually spent more on health and human service, SSI and several other social programs last year than we did for defense, I agree, there is waste in military spending too..hell there is waste in all areas of our Govt (can you believe 3 calligraphers that work in the WH made 277k last year, and before everyone screams, they worked there for the last admin too)
Stepping down off my soap box, hope that makes sense Swimmer, I've enjoyed this chance to talk vice snipe :)
@gmram120
Hi there,
I wanted to let you know that the criminal complaint states that the routine check by the case worker was done in 2009, although charges were only brought in mid-January of this year. I will ask our web editor to include that information in the article above.
Thanks for commenting,
Emily M.
well over half the welfare recipients we have
live with the boyfriend/babydaddy who pays for at least half of all the bills. Amazing how many men in Juneau get their mail through their mother's home address for this reason alone.
I've seen women say they'll put off going to the doctor because their boyfriend/babydaddy is working and doesn't want to have to pay anything back to the state because they're saving to buy something brand new.
This is the thinking we have brought ourselves down to with all of the tons of handout programs we have...luxuries are priority #1 and necessities like housing, food and medical care come dead last because taxpayers will eventually foot the bill as long as they squander all their cash or hide it.
do the right thing
I agree that is the thinking of many... but I would include the argument that those who sacrifice housing, food and medical care for useless luxuries are plain stupid. If society is forced to care for stupid people who squander their money buying junk it's the price we have to pay to keep them from stealing it. With all the technological advances we've made we still haven't found a way to fix stupid. Hopefully someday...
@ seakdave
You state:
"We actually spent more on health and human service, SSI and several other social programs last year than we did for defense..."
the defense budget in 2012 was 25% of the budget.
22% was for pensions...including military pensions.
23% was for health care...inclding the VA.
total estimated spending on defense in 2012 including pensions and the VA was at least 1.03 trillion.
the total 2012 budget? 3.5 trillion.
defense is the #1 item of spending in the federal budget.we spend more money on defense than the next ten countries in the world combined. and most of them are allies.
we spend more on health care per capita than other 1st world countries yet live shorter lives.
social security is paid with a payroll tax that exempts those making over $106,800.
I would rather we had people with food in their bellies rather than B-2 bombers, 11 carrier groups, 14 SSBNs, and 450 ICBMs. But hey blowing up the world is better than feeding our poor if it means the 5-10 percent who abuse the system don't get food, at least in your opinion?
SEAKDave - good points.
...I agree with much of what you've said, and I also agree that our society as a whole doesn't have the same work ethic it did.
Remember, though, that you are evaluating your choices, and what people should do, based on your upbringing, and the ethic and skills you bring to the table. What if you were raised by a couple of crackheads? Your experience might be quite different, through no fault of your own, and choices you consider obvious might not be so for someone else.
maybe mandatory drug treatment (also costly) would be the answer. My guess is, though, if people were cut off of whatever assistance they get because they are an addict or otherwise, we'd have a lot more crime, and a lot of bodies in the street.
Personally, I think the point of focus is young parents. If they are on assistance, get them parenting classes - not everyone knows they should read to their kid, and set boundaries. Make performance part of getting the check. Make them pass a home budget class, a cooking class, and have them pass home inspections for cleanliness. somehow, we've gotten to a generation (maybe two) of folks who don't know how to parent and instill work ethic - and their kids grow up - not knowing how to parent and instill work ethic.
Problem is, there are consequences for every action - and a program like that would be very expensive.
There is a lot you can do to
There is a lot you can do to keep the safety net but encourage people to move out of the system. For one, encourage healthy choices by limiting what can be purchased with the EBT card and graduating it so you get more bang for the buck by purchasing basic food stuffs; i.e., your dollar of food stamps can only buy $.50 of a frozen prepared item but can buy $1.25 of fresh vegetables, flour, rice etc. (think healthy eating wont be important with full implementation of Obama Care?).
For welfare, base it on one adult and the number of children extant when they first went on welfare period. Have another kid and you get no additional money.
For unemployment, give even more than now when you first go on unemployment to help get people over the hump and then each month drop it a little to give them an incentive to take a job and work and dont penalize people for actually taking a job even if its low paying. If you look at the statistics it often doesnt pay to take a job so keep paying the difference until the diminishing unemployment balances out. And oh by the way, those same governmental statistics show that there is a huge spike in people getting a job in the last month of their unemployment eligibility...dropping the amount each month will be powerful motivation to find a job.
For government funded HC, if you get sick from your lifestyle only fund the minimum care necessary to ease your pain as you succumb to your poor decisions. That means if you want to drink heavily, smoke, have un protected sex, share needles etc we dont pay for the consequences, if you want to do that get a job and pay for your own care.
I support a safety net for our citizens but we cant afford to be doing things as we have been doing them and there are way too many people who are on the dole who shouldnt be,
takeiteasy
So you've decided to switch over from individual welfare fraudsters to corporate welfare fraudsters. Same diff.
shrike
big thumbs up to all of that rational thinking
Swimmergirl has already
Swimmergirl has already raised this point, but I feel obligated to phrase it another way: many of the most vocal critics against social assistance programs in effect claim the recipients are "bad" people by their moral/ethical standards, be it because they are lazy, addicted, scamming, or what have you. Why do these vocal critics of social assistance then assume that if those programs are cut the recipients will become "good" hard-working members of society?
Simple point: for the free market and capitalism to function at all it requires and actively creates a body of unemployed workers. If there are none, labor itself is a scarce commodity and people start to charge more for their time until a surplus exists. Unemployment is part of the system.
Any chance we could migrate this discussion away from people spouting the oft-repeated but rarely verified anecdotes, tidbits, and not real facts? (Edit: good post, Shrike)
Shrike For President 2016!!!
I'm starting your PAC as we speak! Outstanding thoughts, now if it can only catch on along with work ethic and morals!
I'm off to work my 12 hour evening so the have nots will have something on the 1st with a smile on my face!
Just another...
Just another Obama supporter following the King's orders.