← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

Hunter v. United States

No. 24-1063 SCOTUS · Decided SCOTUS
Cert Granted: Oct 10, 2025 Argued: Mar 3, 2026 Decided: Jun 18, 2026
📄 Read the Opinion

14th Amendment Fourteenth Amendment citizenship clause Rule 32(J)(1), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Yarsley immunity birthright citizenship collateral order doctrine plea agreement waiver of appellate rights

Decision

8-1
Opinion Elena Kagan
Concurrence Gorsuch, J. (joined by Sotomayor, J. and Jackson, J.)
Concurrence Kavanaugh, J. (joined by Alito, J. and Barrett, J.)
Concurrence Barrett, J.
Dissent Thomas, J.

Legal Issues

14th AmendmentFourteenth Amendment citizenship clauseRule 32(J)(1), Federal Rules of Criminal ProcedureYarsley immunitybirthright citizenshipcollateral order doctrineplea agreementwaiver of appellate rights

The Law · How the Case Works

Opinion of the Court

Elena Kagan

Overview

Overview

A case in which the Court will decide whether the only permissible exceptions to a general appeal waiver are for claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or that the sentence exceeds the statutory maximum.

The Facts

Facts

Munson Hunter pleaded guilty to wire fraud and included a broad appeal waiver in his plea agreement. At sentencing, the judge imposed a condition requiring mental health medications without making factual findings supporting its necessity and without informing Hunter of his appeal rights. Hunter sought to appeal the sentencing condition, but the Fifth Circuit held his appeal waiver barred all claims except ineffective assistance of counsel and sentences exceeding the statutory maximum.

The Issue

Issue

Whether a broad appellate waiver in a plea agreement forecloses review of a special condition of supervised release imposed at sentencing without factual findings or advance notice to the defendant of the right to appeal that specific condition.

The Rules

Rule

Appeal waivers in plea agreements are enforceable when entered knowingly and voluntarily, but may not extend to conditions the defendant could not have anticipated at the time of the plea. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d), supervised release conditions must be reasonably related to sentencing factors and involve no greater deprivation of liberty than necessary. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(b)(2) requires the court to advise defendants of their right to appeal at sentencing.

The Application

Analysis

The government argues broad appeal waivers in plea agreements should be enforced as written, barring appellate challenges except for ineffective assistance of counsel or sentences exceeding the statutory maximum. Courts cannot selectively honor plea bargain terms. If the defendant accepted the plea's benefits, the waiver applies to its burdens.

The Conclusion

Conclusion

Appeal waivers in plea agreements are unenforceable when enforcing them would result in a miscarriage of justice. The kind of egregious error that would bring the judicial system into disrepute. Adopts the majority view among circuits. Vacated and remanded.

The Record · 1 original document
Court -
FiledDec 18, 2024
CL Statusterminated
View on CourtListener →

No circuit court data for this case.

Cert GrantedOct 10, 2025
Statusterminated
Filed (CL)Dec 18, 2024
View on CourtListener →

Decision

8-1
Opinion Elena Kagan
Concurrence Gorsuch, J. (joined by Sotomayor, J. and Jackson, J.)
Concurrence Kavanaugh, J. (joined by Alito, J. and Barrett, J.)
Concurrence Barrett, J.
Dissent Thomas, J.
SCOTUS TMR-806f8776 Jul 28, 2026
Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support