United States v. Rodney Elton Harrell

983 F.2d 1078 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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-Appellant, v. Rodney Elton HARRELL, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-50164. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 9, 1992. * Decided Dec. 14, 1992. Before TANG, PREGERSON and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 The United States appeals the district court's refusal to reconsider its order enforcing an expired plea offer over the government's objection. The government claims the district court was without authority to order specific performance of the agreement, which appellee failed to accept within the allotted time. We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3731 , and we vacate the district court's order dismissing Counts I and III, reverse the judgment of conviction on Count II, and remand this case for further proceedings. 3 We review de novo a district court's construction of the law United States v. Semler, 883 F.2d 832, 833 (9th Cir.1989).…