United States v. Marshyia Ligon, 937 F.3d 714

Ligon bought a Smith & Wesson rifle using a friend’s identification (a straw purchase); the rifle was later used in an attempted robbery.
She pleaded guilty to making a false statement in the acquisition of a firearm; the plea agreement contemplated a Guidelines range of 21–27 months and said neither party would recommend a departure or variance.
The PSR applied a four-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) (transfer with reason to believe gun would be used in another felony), producing a Guidelines range of 30–37 months; Ligon objected to that enhancement.
At sentencing the district court adopted the enhancement and the government—contrary to the plea agreement—argued for a 30–37 month sentence; the court sentenced Ligon to 35 months.
The government later attempted an equivocal retraction; the Sixth Circuit held the government breached the plea agreement, that any attempted retraction was not an unequivocal cure, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing before a different district judge; the court did not decide the enhancement merits on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether government breached plea by arguing for sentence outside the agreed Guidelines	Ligon: government agreed to recommend or limit itself to 21–27 months and abstain from recommending outside that range	Government: its argument for 30–37 months was a mistake and later (equivocally) retracted	Yes. Government breached by arguing for 30–37 months; breach not cured
Whether an equivocal retraction by the government cures the breach	Ligon: retraction was equivocal and insufficient to cure breach	Government: attempted retraction cures the breach	No. Retraction was not unequivocal and did not cure the breach
Remedy for breach—whether resentencing must be before a different judge	Ligon: seeks specific performance—resentencing by a different judge per Santobello	Government: argued resentencing by same judge not necessary	Remand for resentencing before a different district judge required
Whether the §2K2.1(b)(6)(B) four-level enhancement was clearly erroneous	Ligon: lacked knowledge/reason to believe the gun would be used in a felony	Government/District Court: found she had reason to believe and applied enhancement	Not decided on appeal (court vacated sentence and remanded; enhancement remains unreviewed)

Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (prosecutor must fulfill plea promises; breach requires remedy)
United States v. Barnes, 278 F.3d 644 (6th Cir.) (government breach of plea agreement reversible)
United States v. Lukse, 286 F.3d 906 (6th Cir.) (plea agreements treated as contracts; ambiguities construed against government)
United States v. Fitch, 282 F.3d 364 (6th Cir.) (remedy for breached plea can include vacatur and resentencing before a different judge)
United States v. Moncivais, 492 F.3d 652 (6th Cir.) (prosecutors held to meticulous performance standards in plea bargains)
United States v. Diaz-Jimenez, 622 F.3d 692 (7th Cir.) (equivocal retraction insufficient to cure breach)
United States v. Purser, 747 F.3d 284 (5th Cir.) (discussing possibility of curing a breach but requiring unequivocal retraction)