After being ordered to undergo involuntary mental health treatment at a “suitable facility” in April 2025, Luke Wenke immediately appealed the court’s decision. His public defender filed a Motion to Stay on his behalf, requesting that the court allow Wenke to remain in county jail pending the outcome of his appeal rather than begin his compulsory treatment.
The district court denied the motion, which isn’t surprising, since the decision was made by the same judge who ordered Wenke to undergo involuntary treatment in the first place. Wenke’s public defender then filed a similar motion with the appeals court.
Prosecution: Luke Wenke Fails to Make a Valid Case for Appeal
Wenke’s attorney refuted the prosecution’s claim that the defendant suffers from delusions while emphasizing the alleged likelihood that Wenke’s appeal would succeed. In response to the motion, the U.S. Government (aka the prosecution) filed the following document urging the court to deny Wenke’s request to postpone his treatment.
The prosecution argued that the psychological/psychiatric analysis that the defense relied on to support its case focused primarily on the “narrow issue of competency,” while the government’s expert, Dr. Corey Leidenfrost, performed the correct type of evaluation for determining whether a defendant is competent but mentally ill and in need of treatment.
Additionally, the government’s response highlights the long-standing practice of accepting a district court’s findings at face value unless there’s reason to believe that “clear error” had been committed at the district level. The document goes on to refute Wenke’s claim that his appeal was likely to succeed while pointing out that Wenke relied on parts of Dr. Leidenfrost’s testimony to argue his case while using other statements from the same expert for the opposite purpose.
Luke Wenke Appeal | Opposition to Motion to Stay
June 9th, 2025
CASE #25-1165, DKT #15.1
Luke Wenke Appeal – 25-1165 – Doc. #15Categories: Luke Wenke, appeals, competency, Court Documents, Obsessions: Katie Obsession, Ryan/Benjamin obsession
Tags: Buffalo, NY; conditions of supervised release, contact ban violations, Dr. Corey Leidenfrost, dangerousness, delusions, erotomania/romantic delusions, involuntary commitment, Dr. Kaitlyn Nelson, U.S. Attorney Michael DiGiacomo, probation violations, psychiatric/psychological evaluations, public safety, Dr. Robin Watkins, U.S. Bureau of Prisons, violations of supervised release (VOSR)