1. When a judge induces a defendant to plead guilty by reassuring him that if his plea is accepted the court is bound to impose a sentence specified in the Rule 11 (c)(1 )(C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (herein after Type-C agreement) and consequently does accept that plea can that judge subsequently --to the defendant's disbelief and horror--deem himself unbound to the Type-C agreement, for one reasons or another, and therefore impose, without giving that defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea, a greater sentence than that specified on the theory it only conditionally accepted or it is differing, enforcing, modifying or ratifying the Type-C agreement?

2. When a judge induces a defendant to plead guilty by promising him that if it accepts his plea it is bound to impose the sentence specified in the Type-C agreement (12 years) and consequently does accept the agreement can that judge subsequently find that the defendant breached the agreement and therefore impose a greater sentence (22 years) without giving that defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea)?

3. Can a judge subsequent to accepting a defendant's guilty plea pursuant to a Type-C agreement for a specific sentence (12 years) thereftAr f.ntl that he has breached-the contract by exercising his First Amendment and therefore impose a greater sentence (22 years) rather than specified sentence (12 years) without giving that defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea?

Can a defendant be found to have breached a Type-C agreement for a specific sentence (12 years) by exercising his First Amendment right?

Must a breach of a plea agreement by a defendant be rationally related to a legitimate governmental purpose in order for the judge to find a material breach of the agreement?

When a judge can deem himself unbound to a Type-C plea agreement and impose a greater sentence