Lewis Price, III v. Leroy Kirkegard
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Price argues that the prosecution breached the plea agreement in this case by submitting letters to the sentencing judge that were written by the victim and by a witness. He relies on Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 , 92 S.Ct. 495 , 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971). Price urges us to adopt his understanding of the plea agreement, which he contends precluded the prosecution from presenting any evidence other than live testimony from the probation officer and the victim. We do not adopt Price’s reading of the plea agreement or agree that the prosecution breached it. The prosecution recommended the agreed-upon sentence at sentencing, and nothing in the plea agreement’s plain language restricted submission of the victim’s and witness’s letters. Montana law allows victims to present statements either in writing or under oath during sentencing, and the parties’ plea agreement expressly contemplated that the parties would present evidence at sentencing. Mont.Code Ann. § 46-18-115; Plea Agreement ¶2 (“The parties agree that at the sentencing hearing, the State and the Defendant may present and argue evidence in support of the plea agreement.”). Price’s Santobello claim fails.