United States v. Jarrid Bloom

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-Appellant Jarrid Christopher Bloom contends that the district court’s restitution order violates the terms of his plea agreement, and he therefore seeks to withdraw the plea. As the facts and procedural history are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as nec essary to explain our disposition. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm Bloom’s conviction.

“Plea agreements are contractual in nature and are measured by contract law standards.” United States v. De la Fuente, 8 F.3d 1333, 1337 (9th Cir.1993) (internal quotation omitted). To interpret plea agreements, this court applies “objective standards” to determine “the parties’ or defendant’s reasonable beliefs that control.” Id. at 1337 n. 7.

Here, Bloom seeks to withdraw his plea agreement because the court ordered restitution despite a statement in the the plea agreement that states “[n]o restitution is involved in this case.” However, the plea agreement also states that “the Court may order the defendant to pay restitution^]” and that Bloom “waives without exception the right to appeal on all grounds contained in 18 U.S.C. § 3742 the sentence the Court imposes —…