evidence that the plea agreement was actually accepted by Judge Lawlis. A plea bargain is a “contract” between the defendant and the prosecutor, but the “contract” does not become operative until the court announces it will be bound by it. Thi Van Le v. Perkins, 700 S.W.2d 768, 774 (Tex.App. — Austin, 1985, orig. proceeding), mand. denied. Perkins v. Court of Appeals for the Third Supreme Judicial District of Texas, 738 S.W.2d 276 (Tex.Crim.App.1987). Although applicant claims a breach of the plea bargain, it was never accepted by a judge. In the absence of the judge’s approval of the alleged plea bargain, it was not binding on the parties, and applicant simply is not entitled to its specific performance. Cf. Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971) (<HOLDING>). In the alternative, applicant urges that
holding that when a court accepts a fixed plea agreement it is bound by the agreements terms holding that both the state and the defendant are bound to the terms of a plea agreement under santobello holding that the state is bound to carry out its side of the bargain once the court accepts a plea agreement holding federal court is not bound by terms of plea agreement between defendant and state authorities holding that defendant was bound by plea bargain to reimburse state for extradition costs despite the fact that the state would not otherwise have authority to require reimbursement