A no contest plea is an option for those charged with a crime, but it means not being able to defend oneself and often results in a guilty verdict. It may be beneficial for minor offenses, but not for crimes that will remain on one’s record. Consulting with an attorney is recommended to determine the best plea option.
A no contest or nolo contendre plea is usually one of three options offered to people when charged with any form of crime, from a simple fine to very serious offences. This plea is quite specific and is a defendant’s way of saying that he doesn’t necessarily agree with the allegations, but will not dispute them. This is not a statement of guilt, per se, although it is often interpreted that way. Usually, when a person files a no contest, he’s doing it for a plea deal or to expedite a process, but people considering nolo contende need to think through his disadvantages.
The first of these is that no contestation means no chance to defend oneself against the charges. While this may be an advantage for some people, it’s a distinct disadvantage for others. Once a person accepts the charges, whether he is guilty or not, the court moves on to sentencing pretty quickly. This can mean things are over quickly and a verdict is made. In plea deals people often agree not to contest minor offenses in exchange for lesser penalties or sentences. On the other hand, when people want to tell their story to a jury or judge, they won’t, and that means missing out on the opportunity to be found not guilty on all charges.
No contest often results in a guilty verdict. A person who is not guilty might not want this on their record, and most people don’t understand the distinction between pleading guilty and declaring they don’t want to fight. Indeed, the motive is less important than the conviction of a crime. It doesn’t matter what people say if they have a criminal record. This issue is important to consider carefully; if the charge is small and will disappear quickly, nolo contende may be a good option, but it may be a bad one if people are convicted of crimes that will remain on their records for long periods of time.
In this issue on creating opportunity in trials, many people believe they will take the favor of the judges they convict if they don’t object. This is usually not true and, in some cases, a judge may be able to refuse a plea deal that he deems insufficient. Often, when it comes to sentencing, there is little difference between not admitting to a crime but not pleading innocent and pleading guilty. The sentence, if left to a judge, could be exactly the same with either of these grounds, and there may be no benefit to not contesting the charges.
For many people, the issue of not running any race goes against the grain, particularly when they believe they are innocent. It is not a plea of innocence, and while it is also not a plea of guilt, it represents a willingness to be accused as if they were guilty. A number of people would rather spend the day in court proving their innocence, and some would rather be convicted of a crime they didn’t commit if it means they can continue to claim they are not guilty. It’s still a judgment call and consulting with a good attorney can be a great means of determining which type of plea is best.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
