The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Long, 949 F.2d 400 (9th Cir. 1991):
In United States v. Tholl, 895 F.2d 1178, 1180 n. 2 (7th Cir.1990), the court found it had jurisdiction over the defendant's appeal of his plea agreement because he raised challenges under sections 3742(a)(1) and (2). We adopt this reasoning. Long is not foreclosed from challenging the legality of the sentence, nor the accuracy of the guidelines range determination just because he signed a plea agreement.
Although the court's decision to accept a plea agreement is discretionary, because such a bargain is contractual in nature, "[t]he government will be held to the literal terms of the agreement." United States v. Bolinger, 940 F.2d 478, 482 (9th Cir.1991) (quoting United States v. Read, 778 F.2d 1437, 1441 (9th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 835 (1986) (internal quotations and citations omitted)).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.