United States v. John Edward Skidmore, Jr. (92-3665), and John Edward Skidmore, Sr. (92-3666)

How courts have described this case

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

• “Having accepted the agreement, the district court was required to adhere to the terms contained in the agreement as the parties understood those terms.”
• “Having accepted the agreement, the district court was required to adhere to the terms contained in the agreement as the parties understood those terms.”
• analyzing a charge bargain and noting that “Rule 11 does not limit the reasons for which the district court may reject a proposed plea agreement”
• \[T]he court's failure to elect clearly one of the options specified in [Rule 11(c)'s predecessor] amounted to an acceptance of the plea agreement.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).