United States v. Augustin Gonzalez

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 24-2377

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Augustin Gonzalez

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield

____________

Submitted: April 10, 2025 Filed: April 23, 2025

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Augustin Gonzalez appeals the district court’s1 order committing him to the custody of the Attorney General for hospitalization and treatment pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4246, which authorizes commitment when a person who is due for release suffers from a mental disease or defect such that his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury or serious damage to property. Gonzalez’s counsel has moved to withdraw.

We conclude the commitment decision was not clearly erroneous, see United States v. Williams, 299 F.3d 673, 676-78 (8th Cir. 2002) (standard of review), as it is supported by medical opinions set forth in reports prepared by mental health professionals where Gonzalez was confined for treatment, and by defense counsel’s independent psychological examiner. The concurring expert reports established that Gonzalez has a mental disease or defect; that his pattern of dangerous behavior is related to his mental conditions; and that hospitalization is warranted, as he has little insight into his condition, and he likely would refuse treatment if released. See United States v. Ecker, 30 F.3d 966, 970 (8th Cir. 1994) (listing factors used in determining potential dangerousness).

We note that the Attorney General is under a continuing obligation to exert reasonable efforts to place Gonzalez in a suitable state facility, and that his custodians must prepare annual reports concerning his mental condition and the need for continued commitment. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 4246(d) and 4247(e)(1)(B).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirm.

______________________________

1 The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Willie J. Epps, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri.