United States v. Dennis ( 1999 )

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
__________________________________________
No. 97-11163
_________________________________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
VERSUS
JACQUELINE DENNIS,
Defendant-Appellant.
__________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(4:97-CV-729-BE)
__________________________________________
June 22, 1999
Before KING, Chief Judge, REYNALDO G. GARZA, and JOLLY, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM1:
Appellant, Jacqueline Dennis (“Dennis”), is currently
serving a 365-month sentence for her participation in a
conspiracy to kill a federal official and for her use of
interstate commerce facilities in the commission of a murder for
hire. She is presently incarcerated at the Federal Medical
Center (“FMC”) after developing complex somatic delusions.
On September 29, 1997, Magistrate Judge Bleil conducted a
hearing on the government’s Petition to “Determine Present Mental
1
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Condition of an Imprisoned Person, and for Appointment of
Counsel and Qualified Examiner Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4245 and
4247.” The magistrate judge granted the government’s petition
which sought the commitment of Dennis for psychiatric care and
treatment.
Dennis raises three issues on appeal: (1) whether the
magistrate judge lacked jurisdiction and/or authority to commit
Dennis to treatment; (2) whether the “preponderance of the
evidence” standard is unconstitutional under these circumstances;
and (3) whether Dennis’ commitment violated her right to free
exercise of religion.
After reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, the
district court’s opinion and hearing oral argument, we conclude
that the district court did not err in its findings of fact or in
its application of law. We note, that although the first two
issues raised by Dennis are identical to the ones presented in
United States v. Muhammad, 165 F.3d 327 (5th Cir. 1999), the
third issue is slightly different.
Unlike Muhammad, where we refused to consider the third
issue because it was raised for the first time on appeal, the
record shows that Dennis raised her right to free exercise of
religion during a district court hearing. The magistrate judge
implicitly credited the psychiatrist in concluding that Dennis
had restricted her diet due to mental disease or defect and not
because she was exercising a religious belief.
We review a district court's factual findings under the
2
clearly erroneous standard. United States v. Lopez-Valdez, No.
97-50949, 1999 WL 350627, at *6 (5th Cir. June 1, 1999)(citing
United States v. Inocencio, 40 F.3d 716, 721 (5th Cir. 1994). A
review of the record reveals that the district court was not
clearly erroneous in finding that Dennis’ actions stemmed from a
mental disease and not from a religious belief. Accordingly, we
AFFIRM the district court in all respects.
3