by the Government to provide relevant factual information or to correct misstatements are not tantamount to taking a position on the sentence and will not violate the plea agreement. A prosecutor has a duty to insure that the court has complete and accurate information concerning the defendant, thereby enabling the court to impose an appropriate sentence. Thus if an attorney for the Government is aware that the court lacks certain relevant factual information or that the court is laboring under mistaken premises, the attorney, as a prosecutor and officer of the court, has the duty to bring the correct state of affairs to the attention of the court. Quite aside from that duty, a prosecutor, if permitted by the sentencing judg U.S.App. LEXIS 315, *7 (4th Cir. Jan. 8, 1991) (unpublished) (<HOLDING>); In United States v. Mondragon, 228 F.3d 978
holding no evidentiary hearing was required where the affidavits of the defendant and his wife were directly contradicted by the defendants sworn testimony during the plea hearing holding that a defendants guilty plea was unconditional where the guilty plea was not in writing and the government did not consent to it being conditional holding the government did not violate its plea agreement with a defendant because in addition to specifically retaining the right to comment at the sentencing hearing concerning defendants conduct and background the prosecuting attorney had a duty to bring all relevant information about defendant to the courts attention at the time of sentencing holding that at resentencing the state must present evidence on an enhanced sentencing factor despite having done so at the prior sentencing hearing holding the government was required by law to correct a defendants misrepresentations at a sentencing hearing and doing so did not violate the plea agreement