United States v. Kathryn Louise Barber

967 F.2d 592 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Kathryn Louise BARBER, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-10076. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Dec. 11, 1991. Decided July 2, 1992. Before HUG, CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 * Barber argues that the government promised Larson, as part of Larson's plea bargain, to dismiss the charges against Barber if she subjected herself to a polygraph examination. " 'In determining whether a plea bargain has been broken, courts look to what was reasonably understood by [the defendant] when he entered his plea of guilty. If disputed, the terms of the agreement will be determined by objective standards.' " United States v. Pomazi, 851 F.2d 244, 250 (9th Cir.1988) (quoting United States v. Travis, 735 F.2d 1129, 1132 (9th Cir.1984) (quotations and citation omitted)), overruled on other grounds, United States v.…