Jacobi Tavares Hunter pleaded guilty under an agreement in which the government promised to recommend a reduction for acceptance of responsibility. At sentencing, the government did not make the affirmative recommendation required by the agreement, and the district court imposed sentence without providing the benefit Hunter had bargained for. The Eleventh Circuit held that the government breached the plea agreement. The court rejected the government’s attempt to characterize the promise narrowly or to treat the breach as harmless. Plea agreements are contractual, but they also implicate constitutional protections because a defendant gives up trial rights in reliance on the government’s commitments. Hunter did not seek to withdraw his plea; the appropriate remedy was specific performance of the promise. The court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing before a different judge, with instructions that the government make the promised recommendation. Hunter’s separate procedural-reasonableness challenge became moot once resentencing was required. The judgment was reversed and remanded.