The government did not request a departure from this guideline range because the petitioner had not fulfilled his obligations under the plea agreement. The record is clear that the petitioner refused to testify against his source. Order Denying Motion for Reduction of Sentence, January 25, 1994. Although the petitioner does not expressly request that his guilty plea be withdrawn, the court concludes that such relief should be denied. When the defendant has breached a plea agreement, a guilty plea entered pursuant to such an agreement need not be vacated, and the prosecution is freed from any further obligation to perform as promised.
Due process is satisfied if the guilty plea is voluntary.
When it is the defendant, and not the prosecution, who breaches the plea agreement, the voluntariness of the plea is not placed in question because it is not the defendant who has acted in reliance on a false promise. The plea colloquy clearly reflects that the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and made with full knowledge of the consequences. That the intended consequences were not fully realized was due entirely to the petitioner's repudiation of the agreement. The petitioner claims his due process was violated in two independent means as a consequence of a dismissed count of obstruction of justice. First, his offense level was enhanced two levels due to the obstruction of justice conduct.