United States v. John George Sahhar

Under 18 U.S.C. § 4246 , an individual accused of federal crimes and found incompetent to stand trial may be committed indefinitely if his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another or serious damage to property. We consider whether this statute violates the fifth and sixth amendment’s guarantees of equal protection, due process and trial by jury.

I

On September 18, 1987, John George Sahhar was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 871 (a) for making a threat against the President of the United States. At the government’s request, the district court held a competency hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241 (a). The court found Sahhar incompetent to stand trial and ordered him committed to the custody of the Attorney General for evaluation and treatment in *1199 accordance with section 4241(d). Findings & Order, Nov. 19, 1987.

The court held another competency hearing on July 29, 1988. Sahhar presented no evidence at the hearing. Dr. Donald R. Butts, the psychiatrist in charge of Sahhar’s evaluation and treatment at the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield, Missouri, submitted a report concluding that Sahhar was a paranoid schizophrenic. Dr. Butts also…

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent.

The majority holds that appellant had no right to a jury trial under the sixth amendment. I agree. I disagree, however, with its rejection of Sahhar’s claim that 18 U.S.C. section 4246 violates his right to equal protection. 1 The procedures prescribed for the involuntary commitment of *1209 individuals charged with federal crimes are not, in my opinion, substantially related to an important government interest and thus violate Sahhar’s rights under the equal protection component of the due process clause of the fifth amendment.

Equal Protection

1. Level of Scrutiny

Neither the Supreme Court nor the Ninth Circuit has ruled expressly on the level of scrutiny which is appropriate for classifications affecting involuntary commitment. However, in Hickey v. Morris, 722 F.2d 543, 546 (9th Cir.1983), the court noted that Jackson v. Indiana, 406 U.S. 715 , 92 S.Ct. 1845 , 32 L.Ed.2d 435 (1972), Humphrey v. Cady, 405 U.S. 504 , 92 S.Ct. 1048 , 31 L.Ed.2d 394 (1972), and Baxstrom v. Herold, 383 U.S. 107 , 86 S.Ct. 760 , 15 L.Ed.2d 620 (1966), suggest that the “heightened rational basis test” is appropriate. The Hickey panel declined to decide the…

917 F.2d 1197 59 USLW 2343 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John George SAHHAR, Defendant-Appellant. No. 88-5413. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 31, 1990. Decided Oct. 29, 1990. Carlton F. Gunn, Deputy Federal Public Defender, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellant. Thomas H. Bienert, Jr., Asst. U.S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before NELSON, BRUNETTI and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. KOZINSKI, Circuit Judge: 1 Under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 4246 , an individual accused of federal crimes and found incompetent to stand trial may be committed indefinitely if his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another or serious damage to property. We consider whether this statute violates the fifth and sixth amendment's guarantees of equal protection, due process and trial by jury. 2 * On September 18, 1987, John George Sahhar was indicted under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 871 (a) for making a threat against the President of the United States. At the government's request, the district court held a competency hearing pursuant to 18…