United States v. John Hardimon, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22834

Defendant, a chiropractor, pleaded guilty to defrauding health insurers and to money laundering; sentenced to 70 months and restitution of about $2 million; plea included a waiver of the right to appeal.
Six weeks after the plea, he moved to withdraw claiming medications (Prozac then Lexapro) impaired his ability to understand the charges and consequences of the plea.
District court held an evidentiary hearing; defendant presented medical articles suggesting Lexapro might affect thinking, and a psychiatrist email about Prozac side effects.
The judge denied the withdrawal motion, finding insufficient evidence that switching medications could produce the claimed dramatic effects and noting the plea hearing showed alertness and clarity.
Defendant argued the plea hearing should have involved a deeper inquiry into his drug regimens and effects on thinking; the court rejected this as unnecessary.
On appeal, the court held that the appeal waiver bars the restitution appeal if the guilty-plea ruling stands, thus the second appeal is foreclosed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the guilty plea properly withdrawable due to alleged medication-induced incompetence?	Defendant argues psychotropic drugs impaired understanding, rendering plea involuntary.	Defendant contends medications (Prozac/Lexapro) caused impairment and he should be allowed to withdraw.	No reversible error; withdrawal properly denied; plea stands.
Did the district court err by not conducting a deeper inquiry into drug effects at the plea hearing?	Defendant maintains the judge should have probed dosages and effects on thinking.	Court should have required psychiatric testimony or dosage detail to assess competence.	Inquiry was adequate; deeper investigation not required.
Does the appeal waiver in the guilty-plea agreement bar the restitution appeal or the challenged portion of the sentence?	If plea is involuntary, waiver cannot bar appeal; otherwise, waiver blocks the restitution appeal.	Waiver should not bar review if plea was involuntary due to medication.	Waiver bars the restitution appeal if the guilty-plea ruling stands; plea is not set aside.

United States v. Weathington, 507 F.3d 1068 (7th Cir. 2007) (no required inquiry into drug effects beyond competence at plea)
United States v. Rollins, 552 F.3d 739 (8th Cir. 2009) (depth of inquiry at plea not mandated for every drug regimen)
United States v. Lessner, 498 F.3d 185 (3d Cir. 2007) (psychiatric evaluation not automatically required at plea)
United States v. Savinon-Acosta, 232 F.3d 265 (1st Cir. 2000) (limits on voluntariness inquiry at plea)
Miranda-Gonzalez v. United States, 181 F.3d 164 (1st Cir. 1999) (considerations for voluntariness of plea)
Jones v. United States, 381 F.3d 615 (7th Cir. 2004) (need for psychiatric affidavit in some incompetence claims)
United States v. Cruz, 643 F.3d 639 (8th Cir. 2011) (affidavit evidence required to prove impairment)