USA v. Brian Graco
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-31166 Affirmed] Judge: JLW, Judge: JLD, Judge: LHS. Mandate issue date is 11/17/2017 for Appellant Brian Graco [16-31166]
Date Filed: 10/26/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
October 26, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:14-CR-150-1
Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Defendant-Appellant Brian Graco was indicted for receiving child
pornography. Graco filed a notice of an insanity defense to be supported by
testimony from Dr. Frederic J. Sautter. The Government filed a motion in
limine seeking to prevent Graco from raising an insanity defense or
introducing any evidence of his alleged post-traumatic stress disorder. Relying
on United States v. Eff, 524 F.3d 712, 717-19 (5th Cir. 2008), the district court
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Date Filed: 10/26/2017
found that Dr. Sautter’s report did not show that Graco satisfied the elements
required for an insanity defense under 18 U.S.C. § 17. The district court
granted the Government’s motion.
Graco pleaded guilty and specifically
reserved the right to appeal the granting of the Government’s motion.
We review a district court’s exclusion of expert testimony for abuse of
discretion. United States v. Ogle, 328 F.3d 182, 188 (5th Cir. 2003). In Eff,we
held that an insanity defense under § 17 requires that the defendant be
completely unable to appreciate the quality of his actions and that having only
a diminished capacity to do so was insufficient for the defense. Eff, 524 F.3d
at 718-720. Graco concedes that the district court was bound by the existing
definition of insanity in § 17 and that Eff governs our review. Graco raises a
challenge to § 17 to preserve it for further direct review.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?