Opinion ID: 201905
Heading Depth: 6
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Fact Bargaining and Other Provisions of the Guidelines

Text: 145 The court also referred to other provisions of the Guidelines themselves as imposing an obligation on the government to disclose all information at the stage a court is considering a plea and not to change its position thereafter. This misreads the Guidelines. One argument from the Sentencing Guidelines is that § 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct) specifies that the base offense level and adjustments be based on all acts and omissions committed, aided, abetted, counseled, commanded, induced, procured, or willfully caused by the defendant and all harm that resulted from those acts. U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(A), (3). There is no claim that the government did not provide such information at sentencing. Ironically, the district court sanctioned the government because it did advance exactly such evidence of relevant conduct at sentencing. By its terms, U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3 concerns what the court should do with the information before it at sentencing and does not create a set of sanctions against the government. 146 The other Guidelines concern arises from Application Note 1 to U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8 (Use of Certain Information), which simply makes it clear that that particular Guideline does not authorize the government to withhold information from the court. In any case, there is no evidence here that Olivero provided self-incriminating information that the prosecution withheld from the court, so § 1B1.8 is inapplicable. 147