Hunter v. United States · ¶62

Now take the Court's next example, a sentence premised on “a blatant constitutional error.” Ante, at 728. As the Court explains, that includes not only sentences based on “constitutionally impermissible factor[s]” such as race, religion, or sex. Ibid. It also extends to “constitutionally infrm condition[s] of supervised release.” Ibid. Accordingly, a defendant may be able to appeal a sentence imposing a condition of release that violates his right to be free from forced medication, or a condition that violates his right to speak or worship freely, or any other condition that violates one of his recognized constitutional rights. Really, I would think a miscarriage of justice all but certain to arise whenever a sentence infringes a constitutional right that was “frmly established at the time of sentencing.” United States v. Carter, 87 F. 4th 217, 225 (CA4 2023) (internal quotation marks…

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