Case: Doc 36 Filed: 11/24/15 Page: 1 of 6 PAGEID 169 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 1:15?cr?1 vs. Judge Timothy S. Black MICHAEL R. HOYT, Defendant. ORDER FOR RELEASE This criminal case is before the Court pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4243. Accordingly, the Court held a hearing on November 24, 2015 to determine whether Defendant Michael R. Hoyt should be released from custody. I. BACKGROUND On November 6, 2014, Defendant was charged with one count of threatening to murder a United States official in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1 and (Doc. 1).1 On December 10, 2014, the Court granted defense counsel?s motion for a examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 424land 4242. (Doc. 8). Thereafter, on April 2, 2015, Shawn E. Channel], ABPP, Forensic Federal Medical Center, US. Bureau of Prisons, Devens, Massachusetts, authored a comprehensive report based on that examination (?the Forensic Report?). (Doc. 15).2 I Speci?cally, Defendant was accused of threatening to murder John Boehner, who, at that time, was the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives. Id. Case: Doc 36 Filed: 11/24/15 Page: 2 of 6 PAGEID 170 Dr. Channell concluded that Defendant was competent to stand trial. (Doc. 15.) Dr. Channel] also determined that at the time of the alleged offense, the Defendant was experiencing a manic episode with features. (162?) Defendant?s behaviors and statements were grossly disorganized, erratic, and delusional. (Id) As a result, the Defendant was unable to appreciate the nature and quality and the wrongfulness of his acts at the time ofthe alleged offenses. (1d) The case proceeded to a bench trial on July 13, 2015. (See July 13, 2015 Minute Entry and Notation Order). Based on the parties? stipulations and the conclusions in the Forensic Report, the Court found Defendant not guilty only by reason of insanity. (Doc. 28). Upon that finding, and as required by federal law, the Court ordered a examination to determine Defendant?s level of dangerousness, should he be released. See 18 U.S.C. 4243(a). On November 18, 2015, Kristina P. Lloyd, Psy.D., Forensic and Joshua Lapin, M.A., Intern, both of the Federal Medical Center, U.S. Bureau ofPrisons, Butner, North Carolina, authored a report based on that examination (the ?Forensic Evaluation?). (Doc. 34). After considering various factors, including Defendant?s history, prior insight into his mental illness, active personal support, and stressors, the Federal Medical Center professionals concluded that ?Mr. Hoyt?s unconditional release to the community would 2 The Forensic Report consists of an eleven-page report as to Defendant?s competency to stand trial and a seven-page addendum as to Defendant?s mental state at the time of the offense. (1d) The addendum is to be read in conjunction with the report. (1d) The Forensic Report was co- authored by Chelsea L. Brieman, M.S., Predoctoral Intern. (Id) Case: Doc 36 Filed: 11/24/15 Page: 3 of 6 PAGEID 171 nit pose a substantial risk ofbodily injury to another person or serious damage to the property of another.? (emphasis in original). This conclusion was also supported by a specially convened ?Risk Panel? comprised of a Forensic and the Deputy Chief of Services at FMC Butner. (Id) Upon completion ofthe Forensic Evaluation, on November 24, 2015 (essentially a year since Mr. Hoyt had been placed in the custody of the United States), the Court held a hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4243(c). Defendant presented the testimony of Dr. Lloyd, Forensic Mr. Lapin, M.A., Intern, Robert Cantlon, Licensed Social Worker, Defendant?s father, Michael Hoyt, and Defendant Hoyt. II. STANDARD OF REVIEW Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 4243, establishes the procedures for the treatment of criminal defendants who have been found not guilty only by reason of insanity. Following the entry of such a verdict, the Court is required to commit the defendant to a ?suitable facility? for a or evaluation. 18 U.S.C. 4243(a), The Court must then hold a hearing to determine whether the defendant can satisfy his burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that his release would not create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to property of another due to a present mental disease or defect. 18 U.S.C. 4243(d), Section 4243(e) provides that ifthe Court fails to find that the defendant has met his burden, the Court shall commit the defendant to the custody of the Attorney General. 18 U.S.C. 4243(e). Ifthe Court ?nds, however, that the defendant has satisfied his burden by showing that his release does not pose a substantial risk of bodily injury to Case: Doc 36 Filed: 11/24/15 Page: 4 of 6 PAGEID 172 another person or serious damage to another?s prOperty, then the Court order the defendant?s unconditional release. See United States v. Baker, 155 F.3d 392, 395 (4th Cir. 1998); see also United States v. Livesay, 600 F.3d 1248, 1251 (10th Cir. 2010); United States v. Stewart, 452 F.3d 266, 270 (3d Cir. 2006). ANALYSIS Here, the authors of the Forensic Evaluation have determined that while Defendant?s original behavior was threatening, ?he is currently treated [successfully] with medication,? and the Risk Panel has concluded that Defendant?s ?unconditional release to the community would not pose a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to the property of another.? (Doc. 34). The Government does not contest the findings of the Forensic Evaluation; indeed both parties stipulate to the contents of the Forensic Evaluation. Accordingly, having conducted an extensive hearing, and upon careful review of the Forensic Evaluation, the prior evaluations performed at FMC Devens (captured in the Forensic Report), and the testimony of Dr. Lloyd, and Messrs. Lapin, Cantlon, Hoyt, Sr., and Hoyt, the Court ?nds and concludes that Defendant has demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that his release would not present a substantial risk of bodily iniury to another person or serious damage to the property of another due to a present mental disease or defect. Accordingly, as required by law, Defendant shall be and is hereby RELEASED from custody. Case: Dot: 36 Filed: 11/24/15 Page: 5 0f 6 PAGEID 173 The Court recognizes the potential risks Defendant may pose film does not continue to adhere to tlte treatment regimen prescribed by mental health professionals, at the hearing. the Court questioned Robert Cantlon. Licensed Social Workerr and Defendant's father to ascertain how they will assist Det'endantl Based on their assurances that the) will monitor and assist in Defendant's treatment. the Court is further satisfied that Defendant's release will not pose any threat to the colnmunity.'1 The Court notes that the responsibility accepted by these individuals is considerable, And yet surely it is far preferable that a person suffering from mental illness, in remission and under proper medicationt be cared for by his family and community medical professionals. rather than be \\arehoused in prison. IV. CONCLUSION Accordingly for the foregoing reasons: (1) Defendant Michael R. Iloyt shall ht: released immediater from custody: (2) The Clerk shall immediately provide Copies oftltis Order to the United States Marshal Service and the Federal Medical Center in Butnerr NC. 3 Upon relca "ill lite with his father and shall seek treatment through the auspices of-- forensic Case management team Defendant will keep regular contact with his case manager who shall meet Mr ant both at the agency and in his re dence. Mr Hoyt with the servt ofa chtatrl who shall cappropnate mediation Defendant will remain me icine compliant and will not consume an) alcohol ever. Defendant will participate in individual counseling with a -- therapist and in its Bipolar Support Group (and his family will participate in Bipolar Support groups too), Defendant will take advantage of employment scrtices by (upon referral from --. And Defendant will have daily contact with his family members ho are eager to strengthen his support system and to it'neccssary. Case: Doc 36 Filed: 11/24/15 Page: 6 of 6 PAGEID 174 IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: November 24, 2015 Timothy S. Black United States District Judge