United States v. Thomas Heyer
740 F.3d 284
4th Cir.2014Background
- The Government filed a certificate under 18 U.S.C. § 4248 seeking civil commitment of Thomas Heyer, a prelingually deaf man who communicates in ASL, as a “sexually dangerous person” after his federal sentence expired.
- Heyer has a long criminal history including convictions for kidnapping and child molestation (1993), possession of child pornography (≈2002), and admissions of sexual contact with multiple boys and possession/showing of sexual images involving minors.
- Forensic experts for the Government (Drs. Ross and Davis) diagnosed Heyer with pedophilia and other disorders and opined he would have serious difficulty refraining from future child molestation; Heyer’s expert (Dr. Lytton) disputed the current pedophilia diagnosis; Dr. Jean Andrews (linguistic/deafness expert) testified about Heyer’s severe language deficits.
- Heyer requested consecutive (rather than the default simultaneous) ASL interpretation for the two-day evidentiary hearing; the district court denied that request but provided multiple interpreter accommodations and allowed Heyer to stop proceedings to clarify understanding.
- The district court credited the Government experts over Heyer’s expert, found by clear and convincing evidence that Heyer currently suffers from pedophilia and would have serious difficulty refraining from child molestation, and committed Heyer under § 4248; Heyer appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court abused discretion by permitting only simultaneous interpretation | Heyer: consecutive interpretation was necessary for comprehension and due process under the Court Interpreters Act | Gov: simultaneous is statutory default for non-witnesses; court offered substantial accommodations and denial was within discretion | Denial affirmed; simultaneous was proper absent showing consecutive would aid efficient administration and no prejudice shown |
| Whether evidence clearly and convincingly showed Heyer is a "sexually dangerous person" under § 4248 | Heyer: court failed to adequately account for deafness/linguistic deficits and expert conflict undermines diagnosis | Gov: experts’ opinion, history, plethysmograph, and actuarial data support pedophilia diagnosis and risk of reoffense | Affirmed; findings not clearly erroneous and court adequately considered deafness and credibility of experts |
| Whether § 4248 violates equal protection by treating BOP inmates differently | Heyer: statute draws improper classification by applying to some under federal control but not all | Gov: statute constitutional; precedent forecloses challenge | Rejected; claim foreclosed by Timms precedent |
| Whether § 4248 is punitive and violates due process (i.e., should be treated as criminal) | Heyer: statutory scheme is punitive and lacks criminal protections | Gov: statute is civil and meets due process; lower protections appropriate | Rejected; district court correctly treated § 4248 as civil and Timms controls |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Sandoval, 347 F.3d 627 (7th Cir. 2003) (district court best positioned to evaluate need/performance of interpreters)
- United States v. Camejo, 333 F.3d 669 (6th Cir. 2003) (deference to trial court on interpreter issues)
- United States v. Urena, 27 F.3d 1487 (10th Cir. 1994) (trial court discretion on interpreters)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain-error standard for unpreserved claims)
- United States v. Hastings, 134 F.3d 235 (4th Cir. 1998) (plain-error review explained)
- Jiminez v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 269 F.3d 439 (4th Cir. 2001) (clear-and-convincing standard explained)
- United States v. Hall, 664 F.3d 456 (4th Cir. 2012) (standards for § 4248 review)
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer, N.C., 470 U.S. 564 (1985) (appellate deference to trial court factual findings)
- Hendricks v. Central Reserve Life Ins. Co., 39 F.3d 507 (4th Cir. 1994) (deference on credibility of experts)
- United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 (1948) (standard for not being left with firm conviction of error)
- United States v. Timms, 664 F.3d 436 (4th Cir. 2012) (foreclosing similar equal protection and due process challenges to § 4248)