Filed: Jan. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-2152 _ United States of America, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Eric Singleton, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant. _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield _ Submitted: January 27, 2016 Filed: January 29, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal prisoner Eric Singleton appeals the district court’s1 or
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-2152 _ United States of America, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Eric Singleton, lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant. _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield _ Submitted: January 27, 2016 Filed: January 29, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal prisoner Eric Singleton appeals the district court’s1 ord..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-2152
___________________________
United States of America,
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
Eric Singleton,
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield
____________
Submitted: January 27, 2016
Filed: January 29, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Federal prisoner Eric Singleton appeals the district court’s1 order, entered after
a hearing, committing Singleton for mental health care or treatment under 18 U.S.C.
§ 4245. Following careful review of the record, which included a treating
psychologist’s report containing the opinion that Singleton met the criteria for
commitment, we conclude the district court’s finding that Singleton was then in need
of hospitalization for care or treatment is supported by a preponderance of the
evidence, and is not clearly erroneous. See 18 U.S.C. § 4245(d) ( burden of proof);
United States v. Bean,
373 F.3d 877, 879 (8th Cir. 2004) (standard of review). The
judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
______________________________
1
The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the
Honorable David P. Rush, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of
Missouri.
-2-