United States v. Peter Four Horns, No. 18-3397 (8th Cir. 2019)

Annotate this Case
Court Description: Per Curiam - Before Benton, Stras and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. The district court did not er in revoking defendant's supervised release and recommitting him. Home | Contact Us | Employment | Glossary of Legal Terms | Site Map | RSS Privacy Policy|BrowseAloud
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 18-3397 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Peter Four Horns lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield ____________ Submitted: May 29, 2019 Filed: June 3, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BENTON, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Peter Four Horns appeals the district court’s1 order revoking a grant of conditional release. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. In 2014, Four Horns was initially civilly committed under 18 U.S.C. § 4246. In February 2018, the court granted the government’s motion for conditional release under 18 U.S.C. § 4246(e)(2), and imposed eight conditions, including that he not commit a new crime. On March 8, Four Horns was released to a South Dakota living facility. On March 20, the government filed a “Notice of Violation and Request for Warrant,” requesting his arrest and confinement. The Notice included allegations that Four Horns assaulted the owner of the living facility, and threatened the police officer who attempted to question him. After careful review of the record, this court concludes the evidence developed during the revocation proceedings supports the district court’s determination that revocation and recommitment were warranted. See 18 U.S.C. § 4246(f); United States v. Franklin, 435 F.3d 885, 889-90 (8th Cir. 2006). The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable David P. Rush, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-