From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Soobrian

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 20, 2014
571 F. App'x 256 (4th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 13-7126

05-20-2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner - Appellee, v. RONALD EDWARD SOOBRIAN, Respondent - Appellant.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Joseph B. Gilbert, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Jennifer D. Dannels, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.


UNPUBLISHED

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:13-hc-02092-BR) Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Joseph B. Gilbert, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Jennifer D. Dannels, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Ronald Edward Soobrian appeals the district court's order finding that he satisfies the criteria for commitment set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 4246(d) (2012) and ordering his commitment to the custody of the Attorney General. We affirm.

At a hearing, Dr. Adeirdre Stribling-Riley, a psychologist who is Soobrian's primary evaluator at FMC-Butner, testified that Soobrian suffers from schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, and antisocial personality disorder. She described Soobrian as extremely hostile and threatening. He has a long history of assaulting others without provocation by his victims. Dr. Stribling-Riley testified that Soobrian will injure or harm someone if given the opportunity to do so. He could not be expected to be compliant with a medication regimen.

Dr. Stribling-Riley concluded that Soobrian's release would create a substantial risk of bodily harm to others or serious damage to the property of others. Based on this testimony and other evidence of record, including forensic reports generated by staff at FMC-Butner and by Dr. Groddy, an independent evaluator, the district court found by clear and convincing evidence that Soobrian satisfied the criteria for commitment under § 4246(d).

After reviewing the record, we hold that the district court did not clearly err in its determination that Soobrian suffers "from a mental disease or defect as a result of which his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to property of another." See 18 U.S.C. § 4246(d); United States v. Cox, 931 F.2d 1431, 1433 (4th Cir. 1992) (stating standard of review). We accordingly affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED


Summaries of

United States v. Soobrian

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
May 20, 2014
571 F. App'x 256 (4th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

United States v. Soobrian

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner - Appellee, v. RONALD EDWARD…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

Date published: May 20, 2014

Citations

571 F. App'x 256 (4th Cir. 2014)

Citing Cases

United States v. White

Thus, section 4246 hearings focus on expert medical evidence concerning those two medical issues. See Vitek,…