With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to demonstrate that any FBI agent gave express authority to Iowa officials to negotiate a cooperation agreement with Kozak on behalf of the United States. Neither testimony nor documentary evidence was offered that such a delegation of authority occurred during the Erickson kidnapping investigation. Second, Kozak has not demonstrated that the FBI agents involved in the Erickson investigation were authorized to bind the United States. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has observed that “‘[t]he rule requiring compliance by the government with promises made during plea bargaining and analogous contexts generally requires that the agent be authorized to make the promise.’ ” Margalli-Olvera v. I.N.S., 43 F.3d 345, 353 (8th L.Ed.2d 683 (1993); see also Cordova-Perez, 65 F.3d at 1554 (<HOLDING>); Fuzer, 18 F.3d at 520 (holding that defendant

A: holding that a suspect must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law that he has the right to the presence of an attorney and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires
B: holding that plea agreement with drug enforcement agency agent not enforceable when agent was not authorized by united states attorney to enter agreement
C: holding that comments that implied that the drug trade would continue if the jury did not convict the defendant were improper
D: holding that even if the agents comments could be construed as an implied promise that cordovaperez would not be prosecuted in federal court cordovaperez is not entitled to the relief he seeks because he has not established that the ins agent was authorized to bind the united states attorney
D.