United States v. Charles Barefoot, Jr.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• recognizing that “an integrated agreement supersedes contrary prior statements” (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted)
• recognizing that 7 USCA4 Appeal: 22-4095 Doc: 53 Filed: 04/14/2023 Pg: 8 of 16 “[a]iding and abetting is not itself a federal offense, but merely describes the way in which a defendant’s conduct resulted in the violation of a particular law”
• explaining that ambiguities in plea agreement are “construed against the government as its drafter”
• explaining that ambiguities in plea agreement are “construed against the government as its drafter”
• noting that “receiving an explosive with the intent that it be used to kill, injure, or intimidate, or to damage or destroy buildings, manifestly would have been a crime of violence according to the parties’ mutual understanding”
• “[A]ll ambiguities in the Plea Agreement are to be construed against the government as its drafter.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).