United States v. Eldrick Deon McNeal
20-11898
| 11th Cir. | Sep 21, 2021Background
- McNeal pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, but the plea was withdrawn after the district court found him incompetent to stand trial.
- The court committed him to the Attorney General under 18 U.S.C. § 4241 for treatment at Butner to attempt restoration of competency; statute contemplates an initial four‑month commitment with possible extensions if restoration appears likely.
- McNeal repeatedly improved and relapsed; he agreed (through counsel) to remain at Butner for treatment beyond four months; later the district declared him incompetent and ordered continued treatment pending a dangerousness determination under 18 U.S.C. § 4246.
- McNeal moved for immediate release and to dismiss his indictment, arguing (1) his hospitalization exceeded the four‑month statutory deadline without timely certification of dangerousness and (2) his continued detention violated due process and speedy‑trial rights.
- The district court denied relief (accepting waiver by counsel or concluding release would not be in his interest). After Butner later filed a certificate of dangerousness in the Eastern District of North Carolina, McNeal sought dismissal there and filed habeas petitions; those proceedings remain pending.
- The Eleventh Circuit limited review to the May 5, 2020 order denying release/dismissal and dismissed McNeal’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding the order was not final and did not fit within the collateral‑order doctrine; it therefore did not reach the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court's denial of immediate release and dismissal is appealable | McNeal: order denying release/dismissal is immediately appealable | Government/District: order is interlocutory and not final | Not appealable — appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; order not final and collateral‑order doctrine not met |
| Whether detention beyond the § 4241(d)(1) four‑month period without certification violated statute | McNeal: prolonged hospitalization beyond four months invalidates custody and warrants release/dismissal | District: McNeal (through counsel) waived the deadline by agreeing to continued treatment; alternative relief not appropriate | Merits not reached on appeal; Eleventh Circuit declined to review for lack of jurisdiction (district court had found waiver) |
| Whether delay in dangerousness certification bars civil commitment or dismissal of the indictment | McNeal: late certification (after four months) undermines government’s civil‑commitment authority and supports dismissal | Government: certification and dangerousness proceedings can be addressed in subsequent proceedings | Not before this court; Eleventh Circuit declined review — North Carolina district court will address the certificate and provide review routes |
| Whether prolonged detention violated due process / speedy‑trial rights | McNeal: continued confinement and delay denied due process and speedy‑trial protections | Government: processes under §§ 4241/4246 and remedies (dangerousness hearing, habeas) suffice; no interlocutory review warranted | Merits not reached on appeal; appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
Key Cases Cited
- Flanagan v. United States, 465 U.S. 259 (1984) (final‑judgment rule governs appealability of district court orders)
- Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463 (1978) (definition of a final decision for appealability)
- Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229 (1945) (denial of motion to dismiss is not immediately reviewable)
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord, 449 U.S. 368 (1981) (requirements for collateral‑order doctrine review)
- United States v. Shalhoub, 855 F.3d 1255 (11th Cir. 2017) (discussing strict application of final judgment rule in criminal cases)
- United States v. Donofrio, 896 F.2d 1301 (11th Cir. 1990) (interlocutory review where defendant deprived of liberty for inpatient competency examination)
- United States v. Gold, 790 F.2d 235 (2d Cir. 1986) (issues of inpatient competency examination and interlocutory review)
- Sell v. United States, 539 U.S. 166 (2003) (limits on involuntary medication and interlocutory review implications)
- United States v. MacDonald, 435 U.S. 850 (1978) (speedy‑trial claim not subject to interlocutory review)
- United States v. Deshazer, 451 F.3d 1221 (10th Cir. 2006) (dismissing interlocutory appeal of denial of dismissal during competency proceedings)
- Cobbledick v. United States, 309 U.S. 323 (1940) (principle that denial of immediate review must practically defeat any right to review to justify interlocutory appeal)