{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "57",
    "document_number": "310-1",
    "date": "07/02/21",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Pennsylvania State Police that he or she was subject to the intervening statute and thus had to comply with the new obligations under SORNA, even though those obligations contradicted the terms of each of their plea deals. Id. at 522-523. Each of the three offenders filed an action seeking the enforcement of the terms of his guilty plea, notwithstanding the fact that those terms conflicted with the newly-enacted statute. Id. at 523-24. Citing Santobello, Zuber, Commonwealth v. Hainesworth, 82 A.3d 444 (Pa. Super. 2013) (en banc), and other decisions, this Court held that the offenders were entitled to specific performance of the terms of the plea bargains to which the prosecutors had agreed. Martinez, 147 A.3d at 531-32. We held that, once a bargained term is enveloped within a plea agreement, a defendant \"is entitled to the benefit of his bargain through specific performance of terms of the plea agreement.\" Id. at 533. The applicability of contract law principles to criminal negotiations is not limited to the plea bargaining process. See United States v. Carrillo, 709 F.2d 35 (9th Cir. 1983) (holding that fundamental fairness requires a prosecutor to uphold his or her end of a non-prosecution agreement). For instance, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has explained that, like plea agreements, non-prosecution agreements are binding contracts that must be interpreted according to general principles of contract law, guided by \"special due process concerns.\" United States v. Baird, 218 F.3d 221, 229 (3d Cir. 2000) (citation omitted). And, in Commonwealth v. Ginn, 587 A.2d 314 (Pa. Super. 1991), our Superior Court similarly held that non-prosecution agreements are akin to plea agreements, necessitating the application of contract law principles to prevent prosecutors from violating the Commonwealth's promises or assurances. Id. at 316-17. Under some circumstances, assurances given by prosecutors during plea negotiations, even unconsummated ones, may be enforceable on equitable grounds [J-100-2020] - 56 DOJ-OGR-00004869",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Pennsylvania State Police that he or she was subject to the intervening statute and thus had to comply with the new obligations under SORNA, even though those obligations contradicted the terms of each of their plea deals. Id. at 522-523. Each of the three offenders filed an action seeking the enforcement of the terms of his guilty plea, notwithstanding the fact that those terms conflicted with the newly-enacted statute. Id. at 523-24. Citing Santobello, Zuber, Commonwealth v. Hainesworth, 82 A.3d 444 (Pa. Super. 2013) (en banc), and other decisions, this Court held that the offenders were entitled to specific performance of the terms of the plea bargains to which the prosecutors had agreed. Martinez, 147 A.3d at 531-32. We held that, once a bargained term is enveloped within a plea agreement, a defendant \"is entitled to the benefit of his bargain through specific performance of terms of the plea agreement.\" Id. at 533.",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The applicability of contract law principles to criminal negotiations is not limited to the plea bargaining process. See United States v. Carrillo, 709 F.2d 35 (9th Cir. 1983) (holding that fundamental fairness requires a prosecutor to uphold his or her end of a non-prosecution agreement). For instance, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has explained that, like plea agreements, non-prosecution agreements are binding contracts that must be interpreted according to general principles of contract law, guided by \"special due process concerns.\" United States v. Baird, 218 F.3d 221, 229 (3d Cir. 2000) (citation omitted). And, in Commonwealth v. Ginn, 587 A.2d 314 (Pa. Super. 1991), our Superior Court similarly held that non-prosecution agreements are akin to plea agreements, necessitating the application of contract law principles to prevent prosecutors from violating the Commonwealth's promises or assurances. Id. at 316-17.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Under some circumstances, assurances given by prosecutors during plea negotiations, even unconsummated ones, may be enforceable on equitable grounds",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "[J-100-2020] - 56",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00004869",
      "position": "bottom"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Pennsylvania State Police",
      "United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Pennsylvania"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "07/02/21",
      "2013",
      "1991",
      "2000",
      "1983"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "310-1",
      "J-100-2020",
      "DOJ-OGR-00004869"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, discussing the applicability of contract law principles to plea agreements and non-prosecution agreements. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes."
}