Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
Reason
Reason
Jacob Sullum

A Supreme Court Decision Restricting Appeal Waivers Underlines the Injustice of Coercive Plea Bargaining

When people plead guilty to crimes, they typically give up the right to appeal any aspect of the outcome, including the sentence they ultimately receive. On Thursday in Hunter v. United States, the Supreme Court imposed limits on such appeal waivers, which are improbably described as "knowing and voluntary" even when the defendant is acting under intense pressure and does not yet know what penalties and release conditions he will face.

"An agreement not to appeal a sentence is unenforceable when it would result in a miscarriage of justice," Justice Elena Kagan writes in the majority opinion, which was joined by seven of her colleagues. The decision defines "miscarriage of justice" as "the kind of egregious error that would bring the judicial system into disrepute." It offers some examples, including a sentence that exceeds the statutory maximum, a sentence "infected with a blatant constitutional error" such as racial bias, release conditions that violate basic rights, and a prison term imposed by a judge who "let an orangutan pick a sentence out of a hat."

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.