EH covered no contest pleas, but for some additional Straight Dope, here’s Bricker’s article on the subject. It also discusses the Alford pleas that Albrecht mentioned.
If you go back to the earliest ages of civilization I’d say one of the biggest reason criminal codes and criminal courts were created was to avoid settling things via lynch mobs and et cetera (of course such forms of criminal justice persist into this very day in parts of the world.) It was understood even back then that aggrieved parties wanted to feel that things were fair to them, it makes for a more ordered society when you have judges handing down punishments versus the victims and their friends getting together and killing the perpetrator in his bed while he’s sleeping the next night.
While we’re not living in the bronze age anymore, we’re still human and there is still a very real need to give the victims some sense of justice (or the survivor’s of the victim in the cases in which the victim is deceased.) I’ve never thought criminal justice systems are entirely about safety, entirely about equity, or entirely about rehabilitation of criminals. They’re about all three things, and victim impact statements can give an impartial third party a framing for the crime. Sentences usually have broad ranges. If I steal $1,000 from my millionaire neighbor he’s not greatly harmed. If I steal $1,000 from an impoverished neighbor and they miss a payment on their home and it is foreclosed on, then they lose their job because their car also gets repossessed and then they fall into depression and substance abuse it is very obvious my actions have caused great harm. That’s definitely something that should rightfully be factored into a sentence. Keep in mind that the accused are allowed to make all manner of statements to try and convince the sentencing authority as to why they should be treated more leniently.
To my knowledge “he could afford the loss” has never been as mitigating factor,.
I’m here to tell you that it sometimes is, even if it’s not written down anywhere. I agree with Martin Hyde. Judge have broad discretion. All things being equal, they will tend to hammer someone who hurt a victim badly more than someone who hurt a victim not all that badly, even for virtually the same conduct.
Yes I know and have see that happen to clients. And these things are often reversed on appeal. Sentencing guidelines exist for a reason.
Until EH gets back, I’ll take a stab at translating the case law and statutes into regular-person-ese:
This is describing a situation where the plea agreement is apparently considered to have been corrupted by the defendant’s own actions:
[ol][li]A defendant is advised to plead no contest[]His attorney works out a plea agreement with the prosecutor[]The defendant does not tell his attorney everything important in rendering that advice[]The defendant accepts the agreement[]The judge rejects the agreement []The agreement cannot be withdrawn[]The only option the defendant has is to take whatever sentence the judge gives them[/ol][/li]
Despite what your friend may have told you or your personal feelings in the matter, he has effectively told the court he is guilty. He is legally guilty of the crime, with all the risks and punishments that go with being guilty, whatever words he used (or didn’t use) to acknowledge this in court. Sorry.
In normal course of events, a defendant can get out of a plea agreement and take their chances with a trial (assuming the exception above does not apply).
A defendant can plead no contest to a crime, they have to have judge’s agreement to allow this plea. The judge can say they won’t accept this plea. The judge can only accept this plea if they are sure the defendant has decided for themselves to do this and that they understand what it means.
A judge can set aside the verdict called for in a plea agreement and allow the defendant to withdraw their plea (again, assuming the above exception does not apply).
The bottom line (assuming I’m interpreting everything correctly) appears to be this: Unless your friend was less-than-honest with his attorney when the agreement was being negotiated, he has the option of withdrawing his plea of no contest and taking his chances at a trial.
IANAL, etc. etc. etc.
It’s worth noting too that the judicial power to reject a plea bargain is not totally on the side of the People. In the rare but extant cases where a judge comes to suspect that a factually innocent defendant is being railroaded into a plea bargain owing to wanting to purge a clogged docket, with appointed counsel “playing the game” (which I’m aware good ones do not, but there unfortunately remain cases of ones who do), he can require that the prosecution prove its case, either on the original charges or move unilaterally to reduce them, with a real potential for acquittal. This happens, of course, far more often in courtroom dramas than in real life, but I believe there was a relevant case in California a couple of years back where it played out precisely as I’ve outlined – and the defendant was acquitted at trial.
Thanks for all your advice, everyone. I’m just a computer geek trying to make a decision and help out in this in whatever way I can. New things have started a ball rolling in another direction. I cannot publicly mention any of them at this point, but I do, again, thank you all for your time.