McIntosh v. Rardin

Background

Patrick Randell McIntosh has been civilly committed since April 2017 and is being held at the Federal Medical Center in Rochester, Minnesota. The opinion states that he was found not guilty by reason of insanity in 2016 on four federal charges and was later committed under 18 U.S.C. § 4243(e).

McIntosh filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The petition and an attached exhibit raised challenges to a Federal Medical Center disciplinary proceeding, conditions of confinement, and the validity or duration of his civil commitment. The court previously directed him to file a standard civil complaint if he wanted to pursue the conditions-of-confinement claims outside a habeas case. McIntosh did not file that complaint by the deadline and instead moved to consolidate this case with another action and requested appointed counsel.

Motion to Consolidate and Appoint Counsel

The court denied the request to consolidate. The other action had already been dismissed, its parallel consolidation request had been denied, and it concerned a different Federal Medical Center disciplinary action. The court therefore found no reason to consolidate the cases under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a).

The court also denied appointed counsel. It explained that civil litigants do not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel and concluded that, at that stage, the case did not appear factually or legally complex, McIntosh could investigate the relevant facts and present his positions, and conflicting testimony was not an important issue.

Habeas Claims and Recommended Disposition

The court explained that conditions-of-confinement claims must be brought in a standard civil action rather than through habeas review. Because McIntosh did not file an amended complaint, the court recommended dismissing those claims without prejudice. The opinion identifies those claims as Grounds 1–4 of the petition, Ground 3 of the exhibit, and the portion of Ground 1 of the exhibit challenging conditions at the Federal Medical Center.

The court also referred to an earlier recommendation addressing the claims challenging McIntosh’s civil commitment. It stated that the earlier recommendation, combined with the recommendation in this opinion, eliminated all claims in the case.

The formal recommendation states that the petition should be denied as to Grounds 1–4; that the exhibit should be denied as to Ground 3 and the portion of Ground 1 concerning confinement conditions; that the action should be dismissed; and that the application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs should be denied as moot. The analysis separately recommends dismissing the conditions-of-confinement claims without prejudice. The document is an order and report and recommendation, so the recommendation was not a final district-court judgment in the text provided.

Result

The motion seeking leave and counsel was denied. The court recommended denying the specified petition and exhibit grounds, dismissing the action, and denying the fee application as moot. The notice states that McIntosh could file specific written objections within 14 days after being served and that the report and recommendation was not directly appealable to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.