Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01792/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01792-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 

---

1The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin L.

Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1792

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Virgil Bryant, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: July 5, 2006

Filed: July 12, 2006 

___________

Before COLLOTON, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Federal inmate Virgil Bryant appeals the district court’s1

 order committing him

to the custody of the Attorney General under 18 U.S.C. § 4245, which provides for the

involuntary hospitalization of an imprisoned person suffering from a mental disease

or defect, until treatment is no longer needed or the expiration of the inmate’s

sentence, whichever occurs first. After a hearing, the district court found the

government had met its burden of establishing by a preponderance of evidence that

Appellate Case: 05-1792 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/12/2006 Entry ID: 2066595
-2-

Bryant suffers from a mental illness requiring treatment in a suitable facility. See 18

U.S.C. § 4245(d) (burden of proof). Having carefully reviewed the record, we

conclude the district court’s finding was not clearly erroneous. See United States v.

Eckerson, 299 F.3d 913, 914-15 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam) (standard of review). 

Specifically, the government offered a June 2004 report prepared by mental

health professionals who were involved with Bryant’s care at the Federal Medical

Center (FMC) in Rochester, Minnesota, where Bryant is confined. These FMC

professionals diagnosed psychotic disorder, substance abuse (in remission), and

antisocial personality traits; they opined that Bryant’s symptoms would likely remit

if he accepted appropriate psychiatric treatment, but it was highly unlikely he would

accept such treatment of his own volition, and without it his symptoms could

intensify; and they recommended Bryant’s commitment under section 4245. The

opinions of the FMC professionals supported the district court’s order. 

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. Counsel’s motion

to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-1792 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/12/2006 Entry ID: 2066595