Opinion ID: 165223
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Commitment Hearing

Text: 9 In May 2003, nine months after Weed's acquittal by reason of insanity, the district court held an evidentiary hearing as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4243(c). 3 The purpose of the hearing was to determine whether Weed could prove by clear and convincing evidence that his release into the community would not create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person. 18 U.S.C. § 4243(d) and (e). Before the hearing, the district court denied Weed's motion to strike as unconstitutional the clear and convincing evidence standard contained in § 4243(d). The court received both testimonial and written evidence at the hearing on whether Weed met the statutory standard for release. We summarize that evidence in detail here. 10
11 Dr. Curtis Grundy is a licensed Oklahoma psychologist who first evaluated Weed to determine whether he was competent to stand trial. (IV R.O.A. at 11-12) Beginning five days after the offense, Dr. Grundy administered numerous psychological tests, reviewed the videotape of Weed after his arrest, interviewed Weed's friends and relatives about his behavior prior to the shooting, and reviewed Weed's records from the federal medical center where he was detained. ( Id. at 15-19) Dr. Grundy testified that Weed displayed symptoms of psychosis at the time of the shooting, including visual and auditory hallucinations, paranoia, delusions, and severe agitation. ( Id. at 19-20) He explained that although Weed demonstrated significant mental status impairment during the initial evaluative session, over the course of December 2001[ ] his symptoms were abating or resolving. ( Id. at 19) He therefore diagnosed Weed as having suffered from a brief psychotic disorder and noted that Weed showed no signs of malingering, or feigning symptoms of mental illness for secondary gain. ( Id. at 17, 29) 12 In December 2002, approximately one year after the crime, Dr. Grundy performed additional psychological tests in preparation for Weed's commitment hearing. These tests included a clinical interview and mental status evaluation to rate Weed for psychopathy and violence. ( Id. at 20) At the hearing, Dr. Grundy testified that Weed's psychotic symptoms had not recurred since December 2001, and that he currently met no Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM-IV) 4 criteria for mental disease. ( Id. at 19, 21) In Dr. Grundy's opinion, Weed's brief psychotic disorder was caused by a mental defect. The exact nature of the defect, however, is unknown. ( Id. at 29, 32) Dr. Grundy testified that none of the tests he relied upon could predict whether Weed will experience another onset of symptoms. ( Id. at 35) He also testified that, according to the DSM-IV, recurrence of a brief psychotic disorder is rare. ( Id. at 33) 13 On cross-examination, Dr. Grundy agreed that a person who has suffered an onset of psychosis is more likely to suffer another occurrence and presents a greater risk to the public than someone who has never had such a condition. ( Id. at 43) Finally, Dr. Grundy stated the potential exists that Weed may still have the mental defect, but that it has not been triggered since December 2001. ( Id. at 33-34) 14
15 The district court certified Dr. Harrison Pope, a Harvard Medical School psychiatrist, as an expert in psychotic disorders. ( Id. at 74) As a professor of psychiatry, Dr. Pope helped draft the diagnostic criteria for psychotic disorders used in the DSM-III and DSM-IV, and has written and lectured on the psychiatric effects of steroid use. ( Id. at 77, 96) In preparation for his testimony, Dr. Pope interviewed Weed by phone, read reports on his condition, watched the videotape taken after Weed's arrest, and reviewed testimony of people who had been with Weed just prior to his psychotic episode. ( Id. at 81, 93) In addition, he listened to conversations Weed had with his mother while he was in jail. ( Id. at 81, 92) 16 At the hearing, Dr. Pope testified that Weed had a brief psychotic disorder with prominent manic features. ( Id. at 95, 106) In Dr. Pope's opinion, Weed's previous steroid use and participation in an exhaustive self-awareness program the week prior to the shooting could be ruled out as causes of the psychotic break, leaving only very rare possibilities as the triggering factors. ( Id. at 97, 98) According to Dr. Pope's hypothesis, Weed's psychotic episode may have developed from a seizure deep in the brain called a complex partial seizure. ( Id. at 99) However, he could not with reasonable medical certainty say that this was the cause. ( Id. at 111-12) If seizure was in fact the cause, Dr. Pope testified that Weed is more vulnerable than the average person to having another seizure, but he also stated that the odds of recurrence lessen as time passes. ( Id. at 102-03) Finally, although Dr. Pope testified that Weed does not currently exhibit any symptoms of psychosis, he clarified, that [statement] should not be interpreted that I'm guaranteeing that he will never again have symptoms because I cannot say that with confidence. ( Id. at 121-22) 17
18 In addition to the testimony, the government introduced into evidence a psychiatric report, titled Certificate of Mental Disease or Defect and Dangerousness, as required by 18 U.S.C. § 4243(b). The report was produced by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and signed by the warden of the federal facility housing Weed. (Appellant's Addendum of Exhibits, Exh. F). The report informed the court that the mental health workers responsible for Weed's care believed that Weed is currently suffering from a mental disease or defect that would cause him to present a substantial risk of danger to others if released. The attached forensic evaluation submitted by staff psychiatrist Bryon Herbel, M.D., and staff psychologist Robert E. Cochrane, Psy. D., diagnosed Weed as having Brief Psychotic Disorder, In Remission. ( Id. at 8) The report noted that Weed demonstrated the sudden onset of manic psychotic symptoms shortly before the December 12, 2001 shooting, but found that these symptoms remitted a few days after his arrest, following treatment with a single dose of Haldol and Ativan. ( Id. at 9) 19 Regarding the link between risk of dangerousness and mental disease or defect, the report stated: 20 Mr. Weed is not viewed as presenting an increased risk of dangerous behavior in his current mental status. However, he is viewed as presenting a high risk of dangerousness if he relapsed into another psychotic episode, which resulted in him committing homicide by shooting and killing a postal worker. The risk of any such future recurrence of a psychotic episode is unknown. Mr. Weed may not have any further such episodes in his life or he may have these episodes at some unpredictable intervals in the future. 21 ( Id. at 10) Based on the gravity of Weed's offense, the lack of data to estimate the risk of recurrence of another psychotic episode, and the lack of any clear strategies to lower this risk, the report thus concluded that Weed's current condition met the standard for commitment and recommended that he be confined for further observation. ( Id. )