United States v. Lynda L. Transfiguracion, United States of America v. Thuy Dao

In this consolidated proceeding, we are called on to interpret and give effect to a less-than-precise plea agreement between the United States and two criminal defendants. The United States appeals from two decisions of the district court, which dismissed an indictment against both defendants on the grounds that the terms of their plea agreements prohibited the government from prosecuting them for the offenses covered by the indictment. We affirm.

I.

On October 10, 2001 a federal grand jury sitting in the District of Guam returned a multi-count indictment in criminal case No. 01-00099, charging defendants Lynda Transfiguración and Thuy Dao, among others, with various offenses associated with a conspiracy to smuggle narcotics from California to Guam between early 1997 and late 1998. Transfiguración and Dao were both charged with conspiracy to import over 500 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride “into the United States from a place outside thereof’ in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 (a), 960, and 963 and conspiracy to distribute over 500 grams of methamphetamine hydrochloride in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. Dao was also charged with conspiracy to launder monetary…

442 F.3d 1222 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lynda L. TRANSFIGURACION, Defendant-Appellee. United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Thuy Dao, Defendant-Appellee. No. 04-10457. No. 04-10458. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted September 16, 2005. Filed April 5, 2006. COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED Leonardo M. Rapadas, United States Attorney, & Marivic P. David, Assistant United States Attorney, Hag & atña, GU, for plaintiff-appellant United States of America. William Gavras, Gorman & Gavras, P.C., Hag & atña, GU, for defendant-appellee Lynda Transfiguracion. Joaquin C. Arriola, Jr. & Jacqueline Taitano Terlaje, Arriola, Cowan & Arriola, Hag & atña, GU, for defendant-appellee Thuy Dao. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Guam; John C. Coughenour, Chief Judge, Presiding. D.C. Nos. CR-01-00099-4-JCC, CR-01-00099-2-JCC. Before B. FLETCHER, JOHN R. GIBSON, * and BERZON, Circuit Judges. BERZON, Circuit Judge. 1 In this consolidated proceeding, we are called on to interpret and give effect to a less-than-precise plea agreement between the United States and two…

dissenting:

In United States v. Barron, 172 F.3d 1153 (9th Cir.1999) (en banc), this Court held the government to the terms of a plea-bargain that failed to provide for the event that the conduct pleaded to would later turn out to be legal. The government learned its lesson and drafted a plea agreement providing that in such an event, the government could prosecute the defendant on the remaining counts. Transfigu-ración and Dao signed on to such an agreement, but today the Court has moved the goal-post and the government loses once again.

The Court asserts that the cooperation clause 1 is the “meat and potatoes of the plea agreement,” supra at 1234, and holds that once the defendant has cooperated, the punishment aspect of the agreement can go by the board. My study of the plea agreement leads me to believe that its principal object was to obtain a conviction for participation in a drug ring, and the defendant’s cooperation did not extinguish the government’s right to keep trying for a conviction and sentence.

This case is about the government’s obligation to dismiss the counts not pleaded to. That obligation is set forth in paragraph one, in which Dao agrees to plead guilty to…