United States v. Dawson

• Court: District Court, W.D. Missouri
• Decided: August 1, 2024
• Docket: 6:12-cv-03554
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 12-cv-03554-MDH ) NATHANIEL DAWSON, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendant’s pro se motion for release. (Doc. 52). Defendant moves the Court for an order to release him from prison. The matter was referred to the U.S. Magistrate and the Magistrate has submitted a Report and Recommendation recommending Defendant’s pro se Motion should be denied without prejudice. (Doc. 53). The R&R states Defendant is not authorized to personally file a motion for a hearing to determine whether he should be discharged. See United States v. O’Laughlin, 934 F.3d 840, 840-41 (8th Cir. 2019) (Section 4247(h) requires motions for discharge hearings “to be filed by an attorney or legal guardian for the committed person.”) cert. denied, 140 S. Ct. 2535 (Mar. 23, 2020). Here, the motion was filed by Defendant, not an attorney or legal guardian. As a result, based on the record before the Court, and the applicable law governing motions for discharge in § 4246 commitments, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 53). The Court DENIES Defendant’s pro se motion (Doc. 52) without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 1, 2024 /s/ Douglas Harpool ________________ DOUGLAS HARPOOL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE