United States v. O'Laughlin, No. 18-2473 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion seeking discharge from a civil commitment in a proceeding under 18 U.S.C. 4247(h). The court held that the specific requirements of section 4247(h) control over the general statutory right to proceed pro se. Therefore, the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion. The court also held that, under the well-established rule of statutory interpretation that specific statutory language controls over more general provisions, the general rule of 28 U.S.C. 1654 must give way to the specific requirement of section 4247(h) that motions for release from civil commitment be filed by an attorney or legal guardian for the committed person.
Court Description: Grasz, Author, with Shepherd and Melloy, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil Commitment. The specific requirements of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 4247(h) control over the general statutory right to proceed pro se, and the district court did not err in denying O'Laughlin's request to proceed pro se; a civil commitment proceeding under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 424 is not a criminal prosecution for purposes of the Sixth Amendment.
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.