LaQuanda Gilmore Garrott v. United States

One long-standing principle of separation of powers is that the Executive Branch decides who to prosecute for a crime, which charges to file and whether to proceed with—or instead terminate—a prosecution. In this case, in exchange for petitioner’s guilty plea to one charge, the government agreed to dismiss all others. Although the judge retained the power to imprison petitioner up to the statutory maximum term, the judge rejected the plea agreement and refused to dismiss the remaining charges because he believed that even the statutory maximum prison sentence for the count of conviction was “too lenient.” The question presented is: Whether a district judge violates the separation of powers by rejecting a plea agreement containing a “charge bargain”—a guilty plea to one or more counts in exchange for dismissal of the others— based solely on the judge’s view that the maximum sentence available on the count(s) of conviction would be too lenient.