Resolution of Criminal Cases Part II – Pleas

When the police charge someone with a crime, they start a criminal case. From the moment that they do, the most important thing to the person charged is how the case ends. Generally speaking, it will end in one of four ways: The Commonwealth could drop the case, or the defendant may participate in some sort of diversionary program, enter some sort of plea, or stand trial.

This series of blogs will discuss the various types of resolutions that can occur in a criminal case. We continue today with Part II, pleas.

Pleas:

Most criminal cases resolve with some sort of plea. There are a wide variety of plea agreements and pleas. They generally are divided by two factors, whether there is an agreement between the parties and whether the defendant is making a factual admission to at least some of the charged conduct. They break down like this:

	Defendant admits guilt	Defendant does not admit guilt
Agreement on charges, sentence, or both	Negotiated guilty plea	Davis plea
No agreement on either charges or sentence	Open guilty plea	Nolo Contendere plea

Usually, but not always, a defendant makes a factual admission as part of entering a plea. A factual admission is an on-the-record statement that he or she did what the Commonwealth says he or she did. This usually takes the form of a judge asking something to the effect of “is that what happened?” and the defendant responded “Yes, Your Honor.”

When a defendant chooses not to make a factual admission, he can opt for a non-trial resolution without a factual admission. In that event, the defendant is not saying that he or she did the things that the Commonwealth says he did. Instead, he agrees that the Commonwealth’s evidence, if believed by a fact-finder, is sufficient to support his conviction.

Material Distinction

Although a factual admission can matter a great deal to the defendant, it does not change what is happening from a legal perspective. Either the defendant is agreeing that he is, in fact, guilty or he is agreeing that the Court should treat him as if he is guilty for the purpose of resolving his criminal case. We will, therefore, focus on the material distinction: whether there is a deal or not.

What kind of plea agreements might a defendant be offered?

Plea agreements can take many shapes and sizes. The parties (the Commonwealth and the defendant) can agree to almost anything. They can agree on what charges the defendant will plead guilty to, what the sentence will be, and any conditions of that sentence. The parties can agree on as little as what charges the defendant will enter a plea to.

Negotiation Examples

As an example, consider a defendant charged with aggravated assault (a felony) and simple assault (a misdemeanor). The parties may agree that he will plead guilty to all charges, be sentenced to six to twenty three month’s incarceration followed by five years’ probation and must complete an anger management class during his term of probation.

The parties could also agree that he will plead guilty simple assault, and a judge would determine the appropriate sentence. In both circumstances, the defendant would enter a negotiated guilty plea, although they present vastly different risks and potential benefits.

Tentative Agreements

All plea agreements are tentative. Until the agreement is announced in open court and a judge approves that agreement, it is not enforceable. If a judge rejects a plea agreement, the defendant is entitled to withdraw his plea. In other words, if the judge doesn’t like the agreement, the defendant is entitled to change his plea back to not guilty.

What potential benefits and risks exist with the types of pleas?

Each different type of plea has its own set of risks and potential benefits. An experienced lawyer should discuss each with their client and explain when each of these tools is best used to further the client’s goals.

Negotiated pleas have one primary benefit: certainty. Prior to a guilty plea, the defendant can be reasonably confident that the judge will accept that plea and enact the agreement. He knows that if the judge refuses to do so, he can take his plea back. The risk, however, is that enters his agreement without knowing what a judge or jury would do with his case.

Open Plea

An open plea has its own unique benefit: the defendant may argue for a sentence better than whatever offer the prosecutor extended, if the prosecutor extended an offer. The drawback, however, is that the judge will decide what the sentence is.

The defendant has no ability to control the judge’s decision and cannot withdraw his plea simply because he disagrees with the outcome. He, also, must usually plead guilty to all the charges he is facing; he is not allowed to pick and choose unless he reaches an agreement with the prosecutor.

Factual Admission

Pleas where a defendant does not make a factual admission are most important when a defendant is concerned about civil liability. A plea with a factual admission is admissible as evidence that the defendant did the act in question in a subsequent civil case. A plea without a factual admission may not be.

Get Legal Guidance

With almost infinite combinations and permutations, anyone considering the entry of a plea would be wise to consult an experienced and knowledgeable lawyer before they do so. While blogs like this are a good primer, they are no substitute for individualized, specific, and diligent analysis and discussion. That is why you should call Pyfer Reese and ask for Dan Bardo if you or a loved one are facing criminal prosecution.

This article is meant to be general and does not in any way provide legal advice or guidance. To get help with your case or situation, please contact our offices.