United States v. Mosley
277 F. Supp. 3d 1294
M.D. Ala.2017Background
- Defendant Shedrick Mosley has a long history (~20 years) of cocaine and marijuana abuse, repeated drug-possession convictions, and multiple prison terms and supervised-release violations.
- In 2010 Mosley pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and was sentenced to ~63 months plus three years supervised release; violations began during that supervised release.
- Mosley repeatedly entered and sometimes completed inpatient and outpatient substance-abuse programs but relapsed soon after release from structured settings.
- Recent violations include testing positive for cocaine, failing to appear for drug tests, and possession of a personal-use amount of crack cocaine.
- The court concluded Mosley may suffer from a substance-use disorder that contributed to the violation conduct and that prior treatment attempts failed; the court ordered a comprehensive BOP mental-health evaluation under 18 U.S.C. § 3552(b) and related statutes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether to order a mental-health/substance-use evaluation to inform sentencing | Government (and court) sought a comprehensive evaluation to assess culpability and treatment needs | Mosley consented to transfer for evaluation; no effective objection recorded | Court ordered a BOP evaluation under § 3552(b) and §§ 4241/4247 for sentencing purposes |
| Whether drug addiction should be treated as a mental illness affecting culpability | Court/Gov: addiction is a DSM-recognized mental disorder that can reduce culpability and inform appropriate rehabilitation | Defense: (implicit) treat addiction as disease meriting assessment to avoid punishing illness; Mosley agreed to evaluation | Court held addiction is appropriately considered a mental disease and ordered assessment of its role in the violations |
| Whether a "compelling reason" exists to have BOP perform the study instead of local community resources | Government/court: local jails lack resources for longitudinal, comprehensive evaluation; risk of release would prompt relapse | Defense consented; release for community evaluation would be unsafe due to relapse risk | Court found compelling reasons and lack of local resources, so directed BOP study under § 3552(b) |
| Whether transfer to BOP for evaluation raises due-process concerns | Defense raised potential due-process issues generally; court required government to show compelling interest before custodial transfer | Mosley agreed on record to transfer, mitigating due-process concerns | Court noted due-process issues but found them unwarranted here given Mosley’s on-record consent |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962) (holding criminalizing addiction as status violated Eighth Amendment)
- United States v. Crawford, 407 F.3d 1174 (11th Cir. 2005) (sentence must be reasonable under § 3553(a))
- United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) (Guidelines advisory; courts must consult them)
- Vitek v. Jones, 445 U.S. 480 (1980) (prisoner transfer to mental hospital implicates due-process protections)
- United States v. Neal, 679 F.3d 737 (8th Cir. 2012) (due-process considerations for involuntary custodial psychiatric evaluations)
- United States v. Deters, 143 F.3d 577 (10th Cir. 1998) (similar due-process considerations for psychiatric evaluation)
- United States v. Donaghe, 924 F.2d 940 (9th Cir. 1991) (noting limited case law on what constitutes a "compelling reason" under statutes governing placement for evaluation)