Case Explained: Summary Calendar United States of America Plaintiff— v. Jason Lee Pride Defendant—

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-02 The Fifth Circuit denied the appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw under *Anders v. California*, ruling that the appeal contains at least one non-frivolous issue despite the defendant’s plea agreement waiver of appellate rights. The court applied the standard requiring a “conscientious examination” of the record to determine if an appeal is “wholly frivolous,” noting that while the government intends to enforce the waiver, recent Supreme Court precedent in *Hunter v. United States* recognizes a miscarriage-of-justice exception for valid waivers when a sentence exceeds statutory limits or involves egregious errors undermining public confidence. Specifically, the court identified a potential argument under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) and *United States v. Mendoza*, which holds that financial-disclosure conditions imposed without a restitution order may constitute an unreasonable deprivation of liberty, suggesting such a condition could trigger the *Hunter* exception if deemed egregious enough to warrant setting aside the waiver. Consequently, the court ordered counsel to file a merits brief within 30 days addressing this and any other non-frivolous issues, directing the Clerk’s Office to establish a briefing schedule. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.