DPP deal and the judge

Buttscratcha · 01-12-2021 7:59pm #1

You are charged on 3 counts.

The dpp offers you a deal. They will drop one charge if you plead guilty to the other two. You accept.

When the case is heard, is the judge aware of the charge that is dropped? Can the prosecution bring it up and can the judge still hold it against you?

Peregrinus · 02-12-2021 3:00am

The judge is aware that you were charged with X, Y and Z, that you are pleading guilty to X and that the state is dropping charges Y and Z.

He does not get to hear about the facts relevant to charges Y and Z, except to the extent that they are also facts relevant to charge X.

You are sentenced only in relation to charge X, and taking account of the facts and circumstances relevant to charge X. So far as the judge is concerned, the state not proceeding with charges Y and Z has the same relevance to charge X, and the appropriate sentence for charge X, as if you had never been charged with Y or Z in the first place. You will not be sentenced in respect of an offence of which you have not been convicted.

Victor · 02-12-2021 10:53am

At a later date, can you be re-charged with the dropped offences?

Buttscratcha · 02-12-2021 10:53am

@Peregrinus thank you very much for that

Claw Hammer · 02-12-2021 1:39pm

Some defendants plead guilty to a charge and have others dropped and then appeal against the charge they were convicted on.

Peregrinus · 03-12-2021 1:41am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118256203#Comment_118256203

When you have pleaded guilty, it's extremely rare to be successful on an appeal against conviction; you'd need extraordinary facts to emerge to have even the ghost of a chance of a successful appeal.

Peregrinus · 03-12-2021 1:53am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118255406#Comment_118255406

Formally, it depends on the stage at which the charges are dropped.

If you have been charged with X, Y and Z and, at the opening of the trial, you plead guilty to X and the state announces that it is not proceeding with charges Y and Z, the court will dismiss charges Y and Z (because no evidence has been offered in support of them) and that is an acquittal. You cannot later be charged and tried a second time for an offence of which you have already been charged and acquitted. So that is final. And this is what normally happens.

But if the deal is made much earlier in the process, when you are still being interviewed by the police, and the police indicate that if you will confess to X they won't find it necessary to investigate Y and Z any further or charge you with them, and you do confess, then you don't get charged with Y and Z, and therefore you don't get acquitted. And in that case there's no formal bar to your later being charged with Y and Z.

But that's unlikely to happen in practice, because this is one of the rare occasions on which - contrary to what I just said in my post above - you might then be successful in an appeal against your conviction for charge X. You'd argue that there was oppressive and/or misleading conduct by the prosecution, inducing you to plead guilty to X (even though you hadn't done it/had a good defence) by falsely representing that you would thereby avoid being investigated/prosecuted for charges Y and Z, and that this abuse of prosecutorial power is a reason why your plea should not be fatal in a subsequent appeal. And, because the state doesn't want you to appeal your conviction for charge X in such circumstances, if they got that conviction by agreeing not to charge you with Y and Z, they won't charge you with Y and Z.

GM228 · 09-12-2021 7:08pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118260746#Comment_118260746

"If you have been charged with X, Y and Z and, at the opening of the trial, you plead guilty to X and the state announces that it is not proceeding with charges Y and Z, the court will dismiss charges Y and Z (because no evidence has been offered in support of them) and that is an acquittal. You cannot later be charged and tried a second time for an offence of which you have already been charged and acquitted. So that is final. And this is what normally happens"

In that case there is no acquittal/dismissal because the charges are dropped and those charges are not heard, there can't be dismissal or acquittal if the charge is not proceeded with, rather, we there would be either a discontinuance, withdrawal, strike out or a nolle prosequi (depending on the court), and then the same charges absolutely can be brought again (subject to the principles of res judicata of course).

Obviously if the dropping of such charges was subject to a plea bargain like the OP asks then there will not be the same charges down the line, but, otherwise there absolutely can be.

Peregrinus · 10-12-2021 1:32am

Isn't a strike out tantamount to an acquittal?

I understand that a nolle prosequi is not an acquittal and the same charges could be brought again. But I also understand - I can be corrected on this - that when the state drops charges it doesn't usually enter a nolle prosequi; it consents to the charges being struck out.

GM228 · 10-12-2021 12:02pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118299029#Comment_118299029

No, strike out and acquittal are far from tantamount, the single biggest difference being when you are acquitted the charge has been heard and determined and so res judicata comes into play, a strike out on the other hand means the charge was not heard or determined and so res judicata does not come into play.

It is often the case that when the accused agrees to plead guilty to a particular charge (and/or even a new charge) the DPP will enter a nolle prosequi for the remaining charges, or if not they can seek a discontinuance, withdrawal or strike out, but none of those options are tantamount to being acquitted (or dismissed in the DC).

Victor · 10-12-2021 12:42pm

What happens on cases that are reported as "defendant pleaded guilty at Ballybeg District Court to 10 sample charges of theft" where there were, say, 50 charges?

Sierra Oscar · 11-12-2021 10:23pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118300178#Comment_118300178

When sample charges are referenced it usually means that other offences never made it to the point of the defendant being charged with said offences.

Usually arises where a Garda investigation uncovers a whole raft of potential offences. Defendant co-operates with investigation, and Gardaí gather enough evidence to charge defendant with a portion of the offences in the understanding that the defendant will plead guilty.

It saves the Gardaí having to commit a huge amount of manpower hours to investigating every single offence to exhaustion while at the same time securing convictions which demonstrate a defendants guilt. It also allows the Gardaí to mark all of the incidents as detected. The defendant is spared the possibility of being charged and convicted with a whole raft of offences outside of the sample charges, hence why they might co-operate with Gardaí / the DPP.

So in your scenario, there might have been 50 theft offences but only 10 charges preferred. There wouldn't necessarily be 40 other charges dropped, the defendant wouldn't be charged with them in the first place.

GM228 · 11-12-2021 10:24pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118300178#Comment_118300178

In such a case there are not 50 charges, rather there are 10 with which you are charged, convicted and sentenced.

These 10 sample charges are properly known as representative counts, they represent those and the other 40 offences (note I say offences and not charges as no specific charge is made). You will be sentenced based on the 10 charges you were convicted of, not all 50 offences.

Victor · 12-12-2021 1:28am

Do the other offences hang over the accused for future use against them?

Isn't the phrase "the other charges were taken into account in sentencing" sometimes / often used?

GM228 · 12-12-2021 2:06am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118307899#Comment_118307899

No, it does not hang over you (despite the fact that you have not been charged or tried with those offences).

If the DPP chose to only take sample charges representing them all and then tried to take further charges where the sample counts were representative of those it would be considered an abuse of process.

That phrase is incorrect, the remaining offences can not be takn into account for sentencing, despite them being known as representative charges you have not been charged or convicted of them, to pass sentence based on them would be unconstitutional, you can not punished for something you have not been charged and convicted of, long held by The People (Attorney General) vs O’Callaghan [1966] I.R. 50 Supreme Court case.

DPP deal and the judge

Comments