US v. John Kanios, No. 15-6175 (4th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-6175 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner - Appellee, v. JOHN KANIOS, Respondent - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:14-hc-02188-BR) Submitted: November 20, 2015 Decided: December 8, 2015 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Diana H. Pereira, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Jennifer D. Dannels, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: John Kanios appeals the district court’s order committing him to the custody of the Attorney General in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 4246(d) (2012). We affirm. A person may be committed under § 4246 “[i]f, after [a] hearing, the [district] court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the person is presently 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 district property court’s of another.” finding that 18 the U.S.C. § 4246(d). Government has The established dangerousness under § 4246 by clear and convincing evidence will not be overturned on appeal unless it is clearly erroneous. United States v. LeClair, 338 F.3d 882, 885 (8th Cir. 2003); United States v. Cox, 964 F.2d 1431, 1433 (4th Cir. 1992). Dr. Maureen Reardon — a staff psychiatrist at the Federal Medical Center in Butner, North Carolina evaluated Kanios and issued a report. (“FMC Butner”) — She concluded that Kanios suffers from schizophrenia and that his mental illness is such that his release would pose a substantial risk of bodily injury to another person or serious damage to the property of another. Dr. Reardon based her opinion on several observations: Kanios’ symptoms included “prominent paranoia, behavioral disturbances (e.g., aggression, social withdrawal), probable hallucinations, 2 mild thought disorder, and mood disturbances, to include expressions of overt hostility,” (J.A. 58); * Kanios’ past history of violence damaging included property, two and incidents aggravated of domestic burglary; violence, Kanios had an extensive history with firearms; and Kanios did not have any support from family or friends. Graddy likewise reviewing concluded, relevant Independent evaluator Dr. Logan after records, that interviewing Kanios Kanios and suffers from schizophrenia and presented several risk factors associated with an increased risk of future violence. At a hearing, Dr. forensic psychology. underlying charges Reardon testified as an expert in She testified regarding the nature of the against Kanios, the reasons behind her diagnosis, and Kanios’ mental health history, criminal history, and institutional adjustment. that an FMC Butner Finally, Dr. Reardon testified risk-assessment panel concurred in her opinion that Kanios represented a substantial risk of bodily injury to another and destruction to the property of another if released into the community. expert reports district court prepared found by by Based on this testimony and the Dr. clear Reardon and and Dr. convincing Graddy, evidence the that Kanios satisfied the criteria for commitment under § 4246(d). * “J.A.” refers to the joint appendix filed by the parties. 3 Kanios argues on appeal that his substantial dangerousness was not established by clear and convincing evidence because he had not received any incident reports at FMC Butner and that the experts’ conclusions were based on conjecture and speculation. As Kanios acknowledges, overt acts of violence are not required to prove substantial dangerousness in a § 4246(d) case. United States 2002). v. Williams, 299 F.3d 673, 677 (8th Cir. Additionally, “a finding of ‘substantial risk’ under [§] 4246 may be based on any activity that evinces a genuine possibility of future harm to persons or property.” United States v. Sahhar, 917 F.2d 1197, 1207 (9th Cir. 1990). We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in its determination that Kanios suffers from a mental disease as a result of which his release would create a substantial risk of bodily injury to another or serious damage to the property of another. Kanios has a long history of engaging in violent conduct, a propensity to possess firearms, symptoms of paranoia, and is known to make threats. See Williams, 299 F.3d at 677-78 (affirming commitment decision under § 4246 where defendant had minimal history of violence and problem-free incarceration but also had underlying convictions evincing potential risk of danger, harbored vengeful intentions toward certain individuals, and had periods of incarceration marked by episodes of “bizarre, defiant and explosive” behavior). 4 And while Kanios attacks Dr. Reardon’s report Graddy’s independent observations of as speculative, it was conclusions, Kanios’ behavior, supported relied and on included by Dr. specific a detailed analysis of Kanios’ mental health and criminal history. Accordingly, dispense with contentions are we oral affirm the argument adequately district because presented in court’s the the facts order. We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 5
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
