Arguments  in court proceedings are admissible only to the extent that prosecutors and defence can agree that the accused will plead guilty to certain counts and the prosecutor will drop the rest. [Citation required] Although this is not a plea, the defence may, in Crown court cases, ask the judge for an indication of the likely maximum sentence that would be imposed if the accused pleads guilty.   g) Because of the brevity of oral arguments, the prosecutor should not delay investigative disclosures that must be directed to the defence under existing legislation or rules. b) In order to assist the defendant in making decisions, defence counsel, after considering the available alternatives, should inform the defendant of the alternatives available and consider considerations considered important by defence counsel or the defendant in the decision-making process. Defence counsel should not recommend that an accused accept an application unless an appropriate investigation and investigation of the case is completed. (iv) that the accused waives the right to a speedy and public trial, including the right to be tried by the jury, by complaining of his guilt; the right to insist in a trial that the Crown investigate a reasonable doubt; the right to testify at a trial and the right not to testify in a trial; the right to be confronted in a trial by witnesses against the accused, to present witnesses on behalf of the accused and to have a mandatory procedure to ensure their presence; In some jurisdictions, prosecutors and defendants may cooperate with judges to determine the sentence the accused will receive if the accused agree to oral arguments. However, in most jurisdictions, the role of judges in oral arguments is limited. For example, federal judges retain final authority over criminal decisions and are not bound by prosecutors` recommendations, even though the recommendations are part of the argument. Similarly, federal judges should not be directly involved in oral arguments.
(iii) in any event, indicate to the defendant whether the judge accepts or refuses the proposed criminal concessions or concessions or if an acceptance decision is postponed until the plea is entered and/or there has been prior or intentional reporting. In all other cases where a defendant pleads guilty on the basis of a contract of appeal and the judge decides that the final order must not contain the punitive concessions or concessions provided, the withdrawal of the 14-2.1 ground may be admissible. Standard 14- 3.4. Irreceivable from nominee nolo pleadings, pleas and pleas not accepted (a) A defendant may plead not guilty, guilty or (if permitted by the law of the jurisdiction) nolo contendere. An admission of guilt or a Nolo candidate should only be received by the defendant in person in an open case, unless the defendant is a company, in which case the registration may be filed with the company`s permission by a lawyer or an officer of the company. A defendant can only avail himself of candidates nolo with the consent of the court. b) Parties considering the judge`s granting of concessions or penalties are: The main reason for the argument is that it must be based on the defendant`s free will, the equality of the parties and the expanded protection of the defendant`s rights: c) Defence counsel should enter into an appeal agreement only with the defendant`s consent and ensure that the decision to enter an admission of guilt or a nolo candidate is ultimately made by the defendant.