United States v. Richard Broker , 608 F. App'x 436 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •               United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 15-1125
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Richard Andrew Broker
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield
    ____________
    Submitted: June 29, 2015
    Filed: July 2, 2015
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Richard Broker appeals the district court’s1 order committing him to the custody
    of the Attorney General under 18 U.S.C. § 4246, which provides for a person’s
    commitment to the custody of the Attorney General for hospitalization and treatment
    in a suitable facility if the person is found--by clear and convincing evidence after a
    hearing--to be suffering from a mental disease or defect as a result of which his release
    would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage
    to the property of another. See 18 U.S.C. § 4246(d). This court reviews such a
    finding for clear error. See United States v. LeClair, 
    338 F.3d 882
    , 885 (8th Cir.
    2003). A factual finding is clearly erroneous when the reviewing court is left with the
    definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. See United States v.
    Williams, 
    299 F.3d 673
    , 676 (8th Cir. 2002).
    Having reviewed the record, we affirm the judgment of the district court. There
    was no disagreement among the mental health professionals who evaluated Broker
    that he was suffering from a schizoaffective disorder such that his release would be
    dangerous, in part based on his lack of insight, his noncompliance with treatment, his
    paranoid beliefs, and his history of threatening and violent behavior, with some threats
    directed at specific targets. See 
    id. at 676-77;
    United States v. Ecker, 
    30 F.3d 966
    ,
    970 (8th Cir. 1994); 
    LeClair, 338 F.3d at 884-85
    .
    The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the
    Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the
    Honorable David P. Rush, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of
    Missouri.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-1125

Citation Numbers: 608 F. App'x 436

Filed Date: 7/2/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023