United States v. Nagy

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  Plaintiff-Appellee, v.  No. 02-7595 PAUL NAGY, Defendant-Appellant.  UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,  Plaintiff-Appellee, v.  No. 02-7849 PAUL NAGY, Defendant-Appellant.  Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-951-5-BR) Submitted: March 26, 2003 Decided: April 15, 2003 Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 2 UNITED STATES v. NAGY COUNSEL Paul Nagy, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). OPINION PER CURIAM: In No. 02-7595, Paul Nagy appeals the district court’s orders: (1) finding that he continues to satisfy the criteria for commitment set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 4246 (2000) and continuing Nagy’s commitment to the custody of the Attorney General; and (2) denying Nagy’s motion for reconsideration. The record reveals that, upon Nagy’s motion, the district court conducted a hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4247(h) (2000). At the hearing, Dr. Herbel, a physician at FCI- Butner, testified that the underlying delusions that had previously led to Nagy’s dangerous behavior were still present, despite medication and treatment. The district court had before it at the hearing two writ- ten evaluations, including one from Nagy’s court-appointed psychia- trist, who concurred with Dr. Herbel that Nagy was delusional and should remain in the Attorney General’s custody. Based on our review of the record, the district court did not clearly err in determining that clear and convincing evidence established that Nagy was suffering from a mental disease or defect as a result of which his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to the property of another. We accordingly affirm the decision of the district court. In No. 02-7849, Nagy appeals the district court’s order denying his motion to disqualify a court-appointed psychiatrist and the Assistant UNITED STATES v. NAGY 3 Federal Public Defender. We find no abuse of discretion and therefore affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before us and argument would not significantly aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED