This Court previously reversed and remanded petitioner's case to the court of appeals. The judges of that court, however, have different interpretations of this Court's decision and how to apply it. Under one interpretation, the court of appeals must send the case back to the state court for it to consider the appropriate remedy for the prosecution's breach of the plea agreement. Under the other interpretation, the court of appeals can do nothing but affirm the district court's denial of petitioner's claim.

These disparate interpretations have real world consequences. Without this Court's further intervention, the petitioner may be subject to a reimposed life sentence with no recourse. Thus, the question presented for review is: what was the import of the Court's prior decision? Otherwise stated, whether the court of appeal's majority-decision is inconsistent with the Court's opinion in this case.

What was the import of the Court's prior decision?