Hunter v. United States · ¶134

Without any legal justification for its rule, the Court appeals primarily to the policy instinct that unfairness could result from its farfetched hypotheticals. Surely, the Court reasons, a defendant must be able to appeal a sentence selected by an orangutan. Ante, at 726–727. I disagree with any insinuation that the only thing stopping federal judges from violating their oaths is the possibility of a sentencing appeal. I also disagree with the assumption that the problem of possibly erroneous trial courts can only be solved by possibly erroneous appellate judges. The Government even notes that it can decline to enforce waivers if an egregious injustice occurs. Brief for United States 31. There were no criminal appeals for over 100 years of American history, and our legal system did not descend into chaos.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.