United States v. Ramon Angel Caro

Good Law
93 Daily Journal DAR 8546·997 F.2d 657·1993 WL 236682·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 16043·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5037
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 1, 199389-50311California1,210 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

ORDER

The opinion, filed on May 19, 1993, is withdrawn, and the attached opinion is filed in its place.

OPINION

In multiple-defendant cases, the government sometimes negotiates a “package deal” plea agreement, under which each defendant must agree to the deal before any will be allowed to partake of it. We consider whether such a plea is valid where the district court does not make its voluntariness inquiry with regard to the package nature of the bargain.

Facts

Appellant Ramon Angel Caro pled not guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine, 21 U.S.C. § 846 , and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C. § 841 . At a change of plea hearing, the government filed a First Superseding Information, which charged Caro only with possession with intent to distribute. PSR at 2. Caro pled guilty to that count and, after the customary colloquy, the district court accepted the plea.

But this wasn’t a run-of-the-mill plea bargain. Caro pled along with three other defendants pursuant to a “package deal” plea agreement. Under such agreements, several confederates plead together and the government gives them a volume discount — a better deal than each could have gotten…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.