The Supreme Court on Thursday sent the case of a Texas man who is seeking to appeal one of the conditions that a federal judge imposed as part of his sentence back to a lower court. By a vote of 8-1, the justices held that one can appeal a supervised-release condition even where he or she had generally waived his right to appeal as part of a plea agreement if enforcing such waiver results in a “miscarriage of justice.”
Read more Opinions on their way
In 2024, Munson Hunter pleaded guilty to one count of aiding and abetting wire fraud; as part of the plea deal, the government dismissed nine other counts with which Hunter had been charged. Hunter also agreed to waive his right to appeal except for claims that his lawyer’s performance had been so poor that it had effectively deprived him of his constitutional right to be represented by an attorney. In addition to a sentence of over four years in prison, the court further required him to receive mental health treatment and take medicine as part of his supervised release.
Hunter wanted to challenge that condition, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled that the appeal waiver barred him from doing so – even if the judge had advised him that he had a right to appeal. On Thursday, the Supreme Court sent Hunters’ case back to the 5th Circuit.
Read more Announcement of opinions for Thursday, June 18
In an 8-1 ruling written by Justice Elena Kagan, the court held “that an agreement not to appeal a sentence is unenforceable when it would result in a miscarriage of justice—meaning, when it would leave in place the kind of egregious error that would bring the judicial system into disrepute.”
Read more Roy Moore files emergency application with Supreme Court on $8.2 million jury award