4, 383 P.2d 412 (1963), discussing legislation designed to achieve this result. “Effective criminal law administration in many localities would hardly be possible if a large proportion of the charges were not disposed of by such compromises.” See also state court decisions in Annot., 18 A.L.R.2d 1287, 1314.Įxclusion of offers to plead guilty or nolo has as its purpose the promotion of disposition of criminal cases by compromise. General Electric Co., 329 F.2d 825 (9th Cir. City of San Antonio, 334 F.2d 480 (5th Cir. §16(a), recognizing the inconclusive and compromise nature of judgments based on nolo pleas. This position is consistent with the construction of Section 5 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. The present rule gives effect to the principal traditional characteristic of the nolo plea, i.e., avoiding the admission of guilt which is inherent in pleas of guilty. Pleas of nolo contendere are recognized by Rule 11 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, although the law of numerous States is to the contrary. State court decisions for and against admissibility are collected in Annot., 86 A.L.R.2d 326. In addition to the reasons set forth in Kercheval, which was quoted at length, the court pointed out that the effect of admitting the plea was to compel defendant to take the stand by way of explanation and to open the way for the prosecution to call the lawyer who had represented him at the time of entering the plea. Spitaleri, 9 N.Y.2d 168, 212 N.Y.S.2d 53, 173 N.E.2d 35 (1961), reexamined and overturned its earlier decisions which had allowed admission. The New York Court of Appeals, in People v. The Court pointed out that to admit the withdrawn plea would effectively set at naught the allowance of withdrawal and place the accused in a dilemma utterly inconsistent with the decision to award him a trial. Withdrawn pleas of guilty were held inadmissible in federal prosecutions in Kercheval v. Notes of Advisory Committee on Proposed Rules (2) in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement, if the defendant made the statement under oath, on the record, and with counsel present. (1) in any proceeding in which another statement made during the same plea or plea discussions has been introduced, if in fairness the statements ought to be considered together or The court may admit a statement described in Rule 410(a)(3) or (4): (4) a statement made during plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority if the discussions did not result in a guilty plea or they resulted in a later-withdrawn guilty plea. (3) a statement made during a proceeding on either of those pleas under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 or a comparable state procedure or (1) a guilty plea that was later withdrawn In a civil or criminal case, evidence of the following is not admissible against the defendant who made the plea or participated in the plea discussions:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |