UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6179
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DONALD SNYDER,
Defendant – Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (5:06-hc-02125-BR)
Submitted: September 22, 2010 Decided: October 15, 2010
Before GREGORY and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Jane E. Pearce,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Diana H. Pereria, Research
and Writing Specialist, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant.
George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-
Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, David T. Huband,
Special Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donald Eugene Snyder appeals the district court’s
order finding that he continues to satisfy the criteria for
commitment set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 4246 (2006) and continuing
his commitment to the custody of the Attorney General. We
affirm.
At a hearing, Dr. Bryon Herbel testified that Snyder
suffers from severe schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type.
During his hospitalization, Snyder has experienced wide
fluctuations in his institutional adjustment. When delusional,
Snyder believes himself to be the Holy Spirit or a presidential
advisor. Snyder had made threats during past periods of
decompensation. A brief period on conditional release was
unsuccessful: during his release, Snyder had violated several
terms of release and had skirmished with police. Further, even
with medication, Snyder is likely to have future episodes of
mania and psychosis. Dr. Herbel testified that Snyder’s
unconditional release would create a substantial risk of bodily
harm to others or serious damage to the property of others.
Based on this testimony and other evidence of record, including
a December 2009 forensic update, the district court found that
Snyder satisfied the criteria for continued commitment under
§ 4246.
2
After reviewing the record, we conclude that the
district court did not clearly err in its determination that
Snyder continues to suffer “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 property of
another.” See 18 U.S.C. § 4246(a); United States v. Cox, 931
F.2d 1431, 1433 (4th Cir. 1992) (stating standard of review).
We accordingly affirm. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not significantly
aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3