[Direct answer]The defense of innocence and the plea of guilty and acceptance of punishment are not mutually exclusive. When the evidence is insufficient and the nature of the crime is in doubt, the defense of innocence is more advantageous. According to Article 51 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution, and it is possible to strive for non-prosecution. When the evidence is truly sufficient, the plea of guilty and acceptance of punishment can be used to seek leniency according to Article 15, and the earlier the plea is made, the greater the scope of leniency will be. The decision should be made based on the strength of the evidence and the expected sentencing. In practice, it is often first to review the case for innocence and then to proceed to the plea of guilty and acceptance of punishment. Beijing Henglue Law FirmCriminal defense teamAn overall assessment of the case can be conducted. For more details, please refer to the following link:Beijing Henglue Law Firm.

1. Problem background and typical scenarios

After the plea bargain system was written into the Criminal Procedure Law in 2018, its application scope has continued to expand. Most suspects and defendants in criminal cases face the same choice: either to persist in the fight for innocence or to plead guilty in exchange for leniency. There are three typical scenarios: first, when the evidence in the case is flawed and the nature of the act is in doubt, such as the distinction between economic disputes and fraud, and the distinction between self-defense and mutual combat; second, when the facts are clear and the evidence is sufficient, but there is still room for negotiation on sentencing, such as first-time offenders, compensation for losses, and obtaining a settlement; third, when the suspect has been detained for a long time and hopes to change the compulsory measures or shorten the process as soon as possible. The optimal strategies in these three situations are not the same. Discussing the attitude without considering the evidence is likely to fail on both fronts.

II. Key points of contention

  • The debate over the strength of the evidence: Whether the prosecution's evidence can meet the conviction standard of "clear facts, reliable and sufficient evidence" is not only the practical basis for a defense of not guilty, but also a bargaining chip in the negotiation of sentencing in plea bargaining.
  • The dispute over procedural benefits: pleading guilty and accepting the punishment may result in a reduction in the sentence, expedited processing, and even a change in bail; insisting on innocence will lead to a longer procedural process and a higher risk of detention, but it may result in a non-prosecution or an acquittal.
  • The debate over the timing of the conversion: Does it affect the extent of leniency if one first pleads not guilty and then converts to a guilty plea and accepts the punishment? At which stage of the litigation process is it most advantageous to make the conversion?

III. Professional analysis by Henglue Lawyers

The value of a defense of innocence lies in evidence and characterization: if the objective chain of evidence is incomplete, the interrogation transcripts contain flaws, or the nature of the act falls within the borderline between civil and criminal law, there is still room for insisting on innocence—according to the statutory non-prosecution circumstances in Article 16 of the Criminal Procedure Law and the statutory non-prosecution and discretionary non-prosecution provisions in Article 177, there is indeed a possibility that cases with insufficient evidence or minor circumstances will not be prosecuted. Conversely, if the evidence is interlocking, blindly insisting on innocence will lose the opportunity for sentencing reductions and procedural conveniences. The value of a guilty plea lies in certainty: according to Article 173, if the defendant or the duty lawyer signs a plea agreement in the presence of a defense attorney, they will obtain a sentencing proposal according to Article 176, Paragraph 2, which the court generally adopts; if the guilty plea is made during the investigation stage, the degree of leniency is usually greater. Henglue Law Firm advocates for a "guilty plea based on the premise of innocence review": lawyers first review the case files to evaluate the evidence. If the evidence is insufficient, they focus on evidence and characterization; if the evidence is sufficient, they discuss leniency—the two are not conflicting options, but a sequential relationship.

IV. Practical suggestions and legal basis

The first step is to promptly entrust a lawyer to meet with the client and review the case file in accordance with Article 40 of the Criminal Procedure Law during the review and prosecution stage, which is the basis for assessing the strength of the evidence. The second step is to formulate a strategy based on the evidence: in accordance with Article 51, the burden of proof lies with the prosecution; and in accordance with Article 55, the court shall give greater weight to evidence than to oral testimony. The lawyer shall review the evidence chain item by item. If the evidence fails to meet the standard for conviction, the lawyer shall insist on the client's innocence and strive for a non-prosecution decision under Article 175, paragraph 4, or a non-prosecution decision under Article 177. The third step is to seek lenient sentencing if there is room for leniency, in accordance with Article 15, by pleading guilty and accepting the punishment, and strive for a suspended sentence or a light punishment. Conditions for restitution and reconciliation shall also be created. Decisions at any stage should be documented in writing, and professional lawyers should make decisions rather than letting the client's emotions dominate the process.

5. Henglue Law Firm's Reminder

There is no universal "more advantageous" strategy. What matters is a strategy that aligns with the evidence: pleading guilty and accepting the punishment does not mean admitting full guilt. Before signing the plea agreement, it is essential to listen to the defense attorney's analysis of the evidence and sentencing. The defense of innocence is not about confrontational attitude, but a battle between evidence and legal application. Never substitute "making a fuss" for professional argumentation. If you are struggling with the choice of strategies, you can seek advice from a professional lawyer.Criminal defense | Legal services for criminal case filingMake an appointment for a comprehensive assessment, and you can also get advice on complex situationsSpecialised legal servicesWe should adhere to the principle of evaluating first and making decisions later, and base our choices on evidence.

Q1: Generally, how much can a defendant's sentence be reduced if he/she admits guilt and accepts the punishment?

The law does not stipulate a fixed proportion. The discretionary leniency is determined by the case-handling organ based on the defendant's confession stage, repentance performance, and case circumstances. Generally, the discretionary leniency is greater in the investigation stage than in the review and prosecution stage, and the latter is greater than in the trial stage. Circumstances such as truthful confession, returning the illegal proceeds, obtaining a settlement, and being a first-time or occasional offender can be evaluated cumulatively. The discretionary leniency is reflected in two aspects: obtaining a lighter main punishment, additional punishment, or probationary sentencing recommendations in terms of substantive law; and applying fast-track procedures, completing the case faster, or changing coercive measures in terms of procedural law. According to Article 201 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the court shall generally adopt the sentencing recommendations of the procuratorial organ. It should be noted that the discretionary leniency is based on the premise of "voluntary and truthful confession". Before signing the written statement, the defendant's lawyer should be fully consulted to avoid accepting charges that do not conform to the facts in order to expedite the process.

Q2: Can you still conduct a defense of not guilty even if there's insufficient evidence?

Yes, and this is the most common form of a defense of innocence. According to Article 51 of the Criminal Procedure Law, the burden of proof that the defendant in a public prosecution case is guilty lies with the People's Procuratorate; Article 55 further requires that evidence should be given priority, investigation and research should be emphasized, and confessions should not be easily accepted. Only if the defendant's confession is provided without other evidence can guilt be determined. If the evidence in the case cannot form a complete and closed chain of evidence, or if the evidence collection procedures for key evidence are illegal, the defense attorney can put forward the opinion that the evidence is insufficient and the charge of crime cannot be established, and strive to make a decision of non-prosecution when the evidence is still insufficient after the second supplementary investigation in accordance with Article 175, paragraph 4, or to obtain a verdict of not guilty in the trial stage. It is important to start the defense of insufficient evidence early: after reviewing the case file in the review and prosecution stage, the defense attorney should systematically sort out the flaws in evidence collection and form a written opinion to communicate with the procuratorial organ.

Q3: Can I still change my mind and plead not guilty after admitting guilt and accepting the punishment?

It is possible to change one's mind, but there will be consequences. The confession and plea bargain are based on voluntariness. After signing the plea agreement, the defendant still has the right to change his mind, and the court shall not deprive him of his right to defense. However, changing one's mind usually means that the plea agreement becomes invalid, and the procuratorial organ may adjust the sentencing proposal, and the leniency already obtained will be cancelled. In procedural terms, the case may be transferred back to the ordinary procedure, and the time cost will increase significantly. Therefore, the decision to change one's mind must be based on new evidence or statutory circumstances such as major misunderstandings or being coerced, rather than a spontaneous impulse. Practical advice is: after completing the review and evaluation of the case file during the review and prosecution stage, decide whether to sign the plea agreement. Once signed, unless there is new evidence to support innocence, it is generally not advisable to change one's mind repeatedly, so as not to lose the opportunity for leniency and delay the defense opportunity.

Q4: If the defense of innocence fails, will the defendant be sentenced to a heavier punishment?

The sentence should be translated into English as follows: The sentence states that the punishment will not be increased solely due to the defendant's attitude of defending themselves. The conviction and sentencing are based on the facts and evidence of the crime, and not pleading guilty in itself constitutes an aggravating circumstance under the law. The people's court adjudicates the facts based on the evidence and does not impose unfavorable evaluations on the defendant simply because they exercise their right to defense. However, two points need to be objectively considered: first, insisting on innocence means giving up the opportunity to plead guilty and accept lenient punishment, thereby losing the potential for a reduced sentence; second, the defendant's lack of remorse may affect the evaluation of some discretionary circumstances. A rational approach would be for lawyers to conduct a professional assessment of the strength of the evidence: if the evidence has significant flaws, they should insist on innocence; if the evidence is sufficient, they should strive for the most favorable sentencing through pleading guilty and accepting lenient punishment, restitution, and reconciliation, rather than using a confrontational attitude to replace strategic choices.

Q5: When is the most appropriate time to decide whether to plead guilty or not guilty?

The earlier the assessment is conducted, the better, but the critical juncture for decision-making is during the review and prosecution stage. During the investigation stage, lawyers can meet with the suspect, understand the alleged charges and favorable circumstances, and submit opinions against arrest. At this time, the facts and procedural information should be fixed first. After the case is transferred for review and prosecution, defense lawyers can review all case file materials in accordance with Article 40 of the Criminal Procedure Law, and the strength of the evidence will be clear at a glance. This is the best window to decide whether to plead not guilty or negotiate a lenient sentence. Before signing the plea agreement, all evidence evaluations must be completed. If the decision is made at the trial stage, it is usually too late to negotiate non-prosecution and sentencing. Family members should hire a lawyer as soon as possible after the suspect is subject to compulsory measures, so as to reserve evaluation time for each juncture.

If you are facing similar problems, it is recommended that you consult a professional lawyer as soon as possible with the relevant evidence materials, to avoid missing the statutory time limit.Criminal defense legal services·Beijing Henglu Law Firm