Partially deadlocked jury finds Newport Beach doctor accused dealing drugs guilty of 1out of 35 charges

A partially deadlocked jury found a Newport Beach doctor guilty of making a false statement on a DEA application, but acquitted him of four counts accusing him of illegally distributing controlled substances and were unable to come to a unanimous decision on 30 other similar felony allegations.

The split verdict comes after two weeks of testimony and four days of deliberation. It signifies the conclusion of a criminal case that was initially filed almost eight years ago against Dr. Jeffrey Olsen.

He was accused of knowingly prescribing oxycodone, hydrocodone, Adderall and Xanax that wound up sold on the street in a 35-count indictment filed in June 2017. Olsen and his defense maintain he earnestly believed his patients suffered from severe, chronic pain that required treatment with powerful, habit-forming medication. Prosecutors described him as a drug dealer barely disguised as a legitimate physician.

Two of Olsen’s former patients, James Goodell and Ken Klauson, testified they were “doctor shopping” to gain access to drugs they could sell. They received prescriptions for hundreds of pills at a time, often drawing suspicion of potential abuse or diversion to the black market from pharmacies and insurance companies. Klauson said he exchanged an envelope of cash for prescriptions with the physician in the parking lot of Ruby’s Diner in Laguna Beach on several occasions.

The mass quantities of medication picked up by Olsen’s patients eventually drew the attention of local and federal law enforcement. An undercover Irvine police officer and two Drug Enforcement Administration informants were among those who testified in his trial. The latter recorded footage of their visits with the physician, in which he is seen issuing prescriptions for oxycodone and Adderall without conducting any form of physical examination.

Olsen appeared to be aware of a federal investigation into his practice in text messages with patients presented during court.

“Please don’t repeat the Ruby’s thing,” he wrote in texts with Klauson. “You’ll end up causing me to do hard time. And I will end up the bitch to the guy with the most cigarettes.”

Olsen’s attorneys noted he regularly met with patients to follow up on their care. An expert witness for the defense said visual observation can potentially be enough for a trained physician to develop a diagnosis. They added that trust in the subjective observations of those experiencing pain is essential to a functioning doctor-patient relationship.

“It is not a doctor’s job to say ‘prove it,’” Deputy Federal Public Defender Reid Rowe said. “...that is an impossible position to put doctors in.”

Jurors submitted 12 notes to the court over the course of their deliberations. These gave limited insight into what are designed to be cloistered deliberations.

“They do not seem to be able to let go of personal biases and interpretation of the evidence,” the jury’s foreperson said of apparent holdout jurors.

This prompted concern about the integrity of deliberation. And although prosecutors, defense and Judge John W. Holcomb were wary of having improper influence on the process, the latter found that the court had an obligation to investigate a claim of potential bias “in the interest of justice.”

“We don’t want a jury biased toward a conviction when there shouldn’t be, or an acquittal when there shouldn’t be,” Holcomb said.

The foreperson was brought forth and asked whether the “personal biases” they referred to involved any of a very strict set legally recognized prejudices pertaining to: race, color, religious beliefs, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender.

They said no. Instead, the bias she perceived was related to dissenting jurors views regarding the “medical profession.”

Neither prosecutors nor Olsen’s defense raised any objection after hearing that response. The jury was then left to continue and ultimately conclude their deliberation without further interference.