by Mitch Kokai
Senior Political Analyst, John Locke Foundation
Hunter Biden’s lawyers filed four separate motions to dismiss with the Delaware federal court Monday, asking the judge to toss the three felony gun charges brought by Special Counsel David Weiss following the collapse of the sweetheart plea deal gifted to the president’s son. While the Delaware case is distinct from the nine-count indictment charging tax offenses, which was recently returned by a California federal grand jury, Hunter Biden’s motion to dismiss based on the pretrial diversion agreement could well doom the California tax charges too. Here’s why.
In his motion to dismiss the three felony gun charges based on the pretrial diversion agreement, Hunter Biden argues that agreement contractually binds the government to the terms, as detailed in the agreement. According to Hunter’s lawyers, the pretrial diversion agreement was a wholly distinct contract from the plea agreement that fell apart when the president’s son appeared before federal Judge Maryellen Noreika in July of 2023 to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax offenses. Thus, Hunter posits in his Monday motion, the government is bound by the terms of the pretrial diversion agreement and specifically the government’s “agreement not to prosecute,” even though he never pleaded guilty to the tax offenses.
The pretrial diversion agreement focused solely on Hunter Biden’s knowing possession of a firearm as an unlawful user or addict of a controlled substance, with the government committing not to prosecute the president’s son if he complied with the terms of the agreement for 24 months, which basically required Hunter Biden to remain sober and drug-free and not to purchase any firearms. But the government’s agreement not to prosecute extended much beyond any potential gun charges, including “any federal crimes encompassed” in two attachments, one a statement of facts related to the gun charges and a second a statement of facts concerning Hunter Biden’s business operations and tax offenses.