United States v. Tyrone Wallace

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMay 2, 2025
Docket24-3398
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Tyrone Wallace (United States v. Tyrone Wallace) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Tyrone Wallace, (8th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 24-3398 ___________________________

United States of America

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Tyrone Wallace

Defendant - Appellant ____________

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

Submitted: April 29, 2025 Filed: May 2, 2025 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Tyrone Wallace appeals the district court’s 1 decision to return him to civil commitment following a conditional discharge. See 18 U.S.C. § 4246(f). His

1 The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendation of the counsel, who seeks permission to withdraw, suggests the evidence was insufficient for recommitment.

We conclude otherwise. See United States v. Thomas, 949 F.3d 1120, 1123 (8th Cir. 2020) (reviewing factual findings in civil-commitment proceedings for clear error). Testimony at the revocation hearing established that less than a year after Wallace’s release, he assaulted his sister and went missing. See United States v. Williams, 299 F.3d 673, 677 (8th Cir. 2002) (emphasizing the “special deference” we give to “credibility determinations” (citation omitted)). In other words, as the district court found, he had not “compl[ied] with his prescribed regimen of medical, psychiatric, or psychological care or treatment,” which “create[d] a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person.” See 18 U.S.C. § 4246(f); United States v. Franklin, 435 F.3d 885, 889 (8th Cir. 2006) (explaining that revocation is justified when “a violation of the conditions of release . . . flows from the person’s mental disease and demonstrates that continued release presents a danger to the community”). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel permission to withdraw. ______________________________

Honorable Willie J. Epps, Jr., Chief United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Dorian Williams
299 F.3d 673 (Eighth Circuit, 2002)
United States v. Gordon Franklin, Jr.
435 F.3d 885 (Eighth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Gregory Thomas
949 F.3d 1120 (Eighth Circuit, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Tyrone Wallace, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-tyrone-wallace-ca8-2025.