Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Date: 06-16-2022
Case Style:
Case Number: 3:12-cr-179
Judge: Robert D. Mariani
Court: United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (Lycoming County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office
Defendant's Attorney:
Description: After his guilty plea, the procedural history of McLaughlin's case becomes quite lengthy. On February 10, 2014, McLaughlin's trial attorney, Todd Henry ("trial counsel"), filed a motion for psychiatric examination (Doc. 192) after he had McLaughlin evaluated by John Sanford Baird, Jr. Ph.D. (See generally, Doc. 192; Doc. 192-2; Doc. 419-1). Dr. Baird noted that although McLaughlin had previously been diagnosed with PTSD (among other things), he did not meet the criteria for a PTSD diagnosis at the time of his evaluation. (Doc. 192-2 at 5). Dr. Baird stated that McLaughlin's "predominant symptomatology at the present time is Bipolar I (manic episode)," "[h]is life has been complicated by an anti-social personality dis," and a long history of alcohol abuse. (Id. at 5-7). Subsequent to filing the motion for psychiatric examination, Attorney Henry stopped represe nting McLaughlin and he obtained new counsel, Brian Collins and Lawrence Krasner ("post-plea counsel"). (See Doc. 207; Doc. 208; see also Doc. 466 at 12). In the midst of the turnover with McLaughlin's counsel, no brief in support of his motion for psychiatric examination was submitted, and the Court deemed the motion withdrawn. (Doc. 206).
Outcome: Based on the foregoing analysis, the Court will adopt Magistrate Judge Arbuckle's R&R and overrule McLaughlin's objections, such that the Court will: (1) deny McLaughlin's pro se motions filed before June 1, 2020 as moot; (2) vacate Mclaughlin's conviction and sentence under Count Three of the Third Superseding Indictment (3) deny McLaughlin's request to vacate his convictions under Counts One and Five of the Third Superseding Indictment; (4) deny McLaughlin's request for an evidentiary hearing; and (5) not issue a certificate of appealability.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: