no contest vs guilty

[starfish]

I am paying a traffic ticket.

If I mail in the payment, my plea is listed as No Contest.

If I pay on the city’s web site, my plea is listed as “Guilty”.

Is there any practical difference for a traffic ticket?

[scotth]

IANAL, but… my understanding is that you can appeal a “no contest” plea, but not “guilty”

[Ringo]

Link 1 (Gregg County, Texas) says:

NOLO CONTENDERE HAS THE SAME LEGAL EFFECT AS A GUILTY PLEA.

Link 2 (El Paso) says:

2. NOLO CONTENDERE: A plea of nolo contendere simply means that you do not contest the charge. You will almost certainly be found guilty upon a plea of nolo contendere, but it is not an admission by you that you are guilty. A plea of nolo contendere cannot be used against you in a civil suit for damages.

You must be prepared to pay your fine upon entering a plea of guilty or nolo contendere.

Link 3 (Houston) only says:

At the arraignment setting, the defendant may enter a plea of guilty, not guilty or nolo contendere (no contest). If the plea is guilty or nolo contendere, the defendant may give an explanation in mitigation of any fine to be assessed prior to the judge assessing a fine.

That doesn’t really address the quirk you’ve found in the payment system. But I doubt it makes a real difference.

[honkytonkwillie]

“No contest” is much easier for people to say.

[cornflakes]

Also, you can’t use a plea of no contest as evidence in court. For example, let’s say you hit someone while driving through an intersection and are ticketed for running a red light. A plea of guilty can be used against you if the other person sues for damages, but a plea of no contest cannot. After all, you didn’t admit to anything, you just said that you weren’t going to contest the charges.

[Krispy_Original]

When making a plea in person, the best response is “no contest”.

A “no contest” plea leaves open the possiblity that the judge could find you to be not guilty…or even dismiss the charges.