Understanding Plea Differences: Guilty vs. No-Contest
Hello, this is Tulsa criminal attorney Brian Carter with the Wirth Law Office. Today, I want to address a question I hear often from clients facing criminal charges: What’s the difference between a guilty plea and a no-contest plea?
At first glance, these two types of pleas might seem very similar, but there are important distinctions that can make a big difference depending on your situation.
The Significance of a Guilty Plea
When you enter a guilty plea, you are openly admitting that you committed the crime as charged. You’re telling the court, “Yes, I did what the state says I did.” That admission can be used not only in the criminal proceedings but potentially in future civil cases as well, since you’ve legally accepted responsibility for the offense.
What Makes a No-Contest Plea Different?
A no-contest plea — also known as nolo contendere — is a bit different. You’re not admitting guilt, but you are agreeing not to contest the charges. In other words, you’re acknowledging that the prosecution likely has enough evidence to convict you if the case went to trial. This type of plea still results in a conviction, and for sentencing purposes, it’s treated the same as a guilty plea. However, the key advantage is that you don’t have to provide the court with a factual admission, which can help avoid liability in related civil matters.
So while both pleas will result in a criminal conviction, how that conviction may affect you outside of court, especially in civil lawsuits, can be different depending on which plea you enter.
Schedule Your Initial Strategy Session
Again, this is Tulsa felony attorney Brian Carter with the Wirth Law Office. If you have more questions about your plea options or your criminal case, give us a call at 918-879-1681 or visit us online at wirthlawoffice.com. Don’t hesitate to reach out for a low-cost initial strategy session to discuss your legal options in detail.
