i know what perjury is. One need not be on the stand to be under oath. One simply needs to take an oath, or more simply, attest that statements made to the court are truthful. Often times a defendant pleading from the defendants table is advised his statements are accepted as the defendant attesting to the truthfulness of the statements. That would make a lie perjury.
Here is an Indiana case where the defendant was provided what is a typical plea agreement. Defendant argued he did not receive what was agreed upon and had right to seek resentencing or to withdraw his guilty plea. He lost his https://law.justia.com/cases/indiana...880a254-6.html
I disagree. While they appear to be the same, the initial not guilty plea is merely a formality required to instigate a prosecution. I (as well as others I have talked with) have always had an issue with one pleading not guilty when in fact they were and were quite aware of it. It is not intended to be testimony to ones innocence or guilt but simply the necessary response to cause the state to prove the guilt or the defendant. I believe there should be some other response to state one does not intend on pleading guilty but hundreds of years of practice won’t be changed because of my feelings on the matter.I disagree. Accepting a plea of guilty is no more a lie than a defendant pleading not guilty when, in fact, he is guilty. Can you find me even one appellate decision that states pleading guilty when the defendant is innocent is perjury?