← All Cases

Hunter v. United States

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

Decision

8-1
Opinion Kagan, J.
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.

Opinion of the Court

Kagan, J.

The 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

Whether a general appeal waiver in a plea agreement bars all appellate challenges except claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or sentences exceeding the statutory maximum; and whether an appeal waiver applies when the sentencing court advises of appeal rights and the government does not object to the appeal.

The Rules

U.S. Const. amend. VI Sixth Amendment — right to appeal

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial; appeal waivers voluntarily entered in guilty pleas are generally enforceable.

Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 — guilty plea requirements

Court must advise defendant of rights being waived, including any appeal waiver, before accepting a guilty plea.

The Application

The Government's Position

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.

Hunter's Position

Hunter argues an appeal waiver cannot bar challenges to sentencing conditions that were unauthorized by statute or that violate fundamental rights. A court-imposed requirement to take mental health medications without adequate factual findings raises due process concerns that no waiver should prospectively foreclose from judicial review.

At the Supreme Court

Argued March 3, 2026. The case asks whether plea-agreement appeal waivers are absolute or whether certain claims — particularly challenges to unauthorized sentencing conditions — survive. Circuit courts are split on scope. The ruling will affect thousands of federal criminal cases with similar waiver provisions in plea agreements.

The 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.

Court
FiledDec 18, 2024
Judge
CL Statusactive
View on CourtListener →

No circuit court data for this case.

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

Decision

8-1
Opinion Kagan, J.
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 5, 2026
Subscribe on Substack ↗

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