The U.S. Supreme Court, in an 8-1 decision, upheld a man’s right to appeal a prison sentence that also prescribed him mental health medications. The case, Hunter v. U.S., focused on Munson Hunter III, who was charged with 10 counts of bank and wire fraud. Hunter pleaded guilty to one of the charges in exchange for dismissal of the nine other charges.

The Appeal Waiver

His plea deal included an appeal waiver where he dismissed the right to appeal his conviction and sentence. However, during his sentencing, a probation officer recommended Hunter take mental health medications and undergo certain mental health treatments. Hunter objected to taking mental health treatment or medication and appealed the sentence.

A lower court held that Hunter would not be able to appeal the sentence because he agreed not to appeal as part of his plea deal. However, justices on the high court did not agree. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the agreement not to appeal is ‘unenforceable’ because it would result in a ‘miscarriage of justice.’ Kagan said preventing an individual to appeal could place a significant amount of power into the hands of a judge, without proper checks and balances on said power.

Dissenting Opinion

Justice Clarence Thomas provided the lone dissenting opinion in the case. He expressed skepticism about Hunter’s ability to take issue with his appeal waiver. Thomas argued the history of the judicial system in the United States has not allowed individuals to challenge appeal waivers.

Original reporting: KTBS 3 (Shreveport) — read the source article.