Skip navigation

When an accused admits to having committed a criminal offence, the Crown is not obliged to charge him and the case can be considered an “admission case” (danish: tilst-elsessag). 831 of the Administration of Justice Act (Danish: Retsplejeloven), provided that the confession is supported by other evidence (i.e. a confession is not enough to convict someone alone); The accused and the prosecutor agree; The Tribunal has no objection; No. 68, 69, 70 and 73 of the penal code do not apply to the case. [a] [47] A plea (plea or plea or plea) is an agreement in a criminal proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused, in which the accused agrees to plead guilty in exchange for a concession from the prosecutor or to invoke a particular charge. This may mean that the accused will plead guilty in exchange for the dismissal of other charges on a lesser charge or one of the multiple counts; or it may mean that the accused will plead guilty in exchange for a lighter sentence. [1] The procedures described above also apply to applications under Rule 35, Point b, of the Federal Code of Criminal Procedure, where the sentence of a cooperating accused is reduced after conviction at the request of the United States. Such a deposit is considered equivalent to a request for substantial support for criminal purposes. When deciding whether the prosecution should be dismissed because the person is subject to effective prosecution in another jurisdiction, government counsel should consider all relevant considerations, including: a plea, called a plea or plea, is an alternative and consensual means of resolving criminal proceedings. A plea agreement means the resolution of a dispute without trial, where the defendant agrees to plead guilty in exchange for a lesser charge, a lighter sentence or the dismissal of certain related charges.

(Article 209 of Georgia`s Code of Criminal Procedure) Some differences in the approaches of the countries studied refer to differences in the principles underlying criminal proceedings in inquisitive and contradictory legal systems. In Russia and Indonesia, which apply the inquisitory model, guilty pleas can be judged by the court as part of all the evidence in a trial, rather than being the deciding factor. However, Georgia, which also points to the inquisitive model, has taken a much more liberal approach to negotiating arguments and has inspired its laws to those of countries with adversarial approaches. Some states have tried to hold prosecutors to account for compliance by requiring certification from prosecutors who try to speak to the victim. For example, in Arizona, according to the Georgian Code of Civil Procedure, either the accused or the prosecutor can propose a procedural agreement, or the court may propose this approach. The agreement includes the accused who confesses to the indicted crime, and the prosecutor is then able to request a reduction in sentence or a reduction in the charge. The prosecutor must consult with the victim and inform him of the conclusion of the agreement. An agreement must be authenticated by the court, which must first be sure that the agreement was reached voluntarily.

The court can only make changes to the agreement with the agreement of both parties. Judgments made on the basis of an agreement cannot be challenged unless the accused violates a condition of the agreement. The concession requested by the government in the context of a plea, whether it is a “pricing agreement,” a “criminal agreement” or a “mixed agreement,” should be weighed down by the competent prosecutor in light of the likely advantages and disadvantages of the proposed remedy in the specific case.