Advertisement

Sound Off

Sound Off: What’s the difference in the end result between pleading no contest and pleading guilty?

For sentencing, there is no difference and both are treated as guilty pleas by the courts. But someone pleading guilty is making an admission that they committed the crime. A no-contest plea, on the other hand, is simply a “declaration that the defendant does not contest the charges,” according to Kansas law. A no-contest plea “cannot be used against the defendant as an admission in any other action based on the same act.”

Comments

dajudge 1 year, 6 months ago

If there's no contest, there's no winner.

0

Shelley Bock 1 year, 6 months ago

It also means that the Defendant does not have to state sufficient facts for the Court to accept a plea. While a Defendant may accept responsibility for his/her actions, Defendant may have an inability to state by speaking in a coherent and legally sufficient manner what happened or that they simply don't have the capacity to express such before an open Court.

Thus, the Prosecution proffers facts as to what would be shown by their evidence to the Court. The Defendant doesn't have to agree with the "correctness" of the statement, just that there is agreement that the State's evidence would be presented.

0

Bob Forer 1 year, 6 months ago

A no-contest plea “cannot be used against the defendant as an admission in any other action based on the same act.”

What that means, for example, if you are driving drunk and hurt someone in an accident, if you plead no contest, the party you injured cannot use that plea against you in a subsequent civil suit. INstead, they would have to independently prove you were driving drunk.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.