United States v. Julio Rivera

How courts have described this case

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

• instructing that \[t]he government should make it absolutely clear in a plea agreement that a breach by the defendant releases the government from its obligation to recommend leniency but does not release the defendant from the plea of guilty\
• “[T]he 9 reasonable meaning of the plea agreement is that Rivera’s failure to appear for sentencing . . . would release the government from its obligations to recommend a sentence reduction.”
• “We look to ‘what the parties to this plea agreement reasonably understood to be the terms of the agreement.’ ” (quoting Paradiso v. United States, 689 F.2d 28, 31 (2d Cir. 1982) (per curiam))
• “[B]ecause [the defendant] failed to live up to his obligation [under the plea agreement], the government was not required to recommend a sentence reduction. Therefore, the government did not breach the agreement by declining to make such a recommendation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).