Michał Surówka
advocate
SURÓWKA Law Firm
Voluntary Submission to Punishment (VSP) – Is it Worth It? What Are the Consequences of Voluntarily Pleading Guilty?
It is worth emphasizing that this article is of a general nature. For an individual consultation, please contact Attorney Michał Surówka directly at +48883921775 or via email at adwokat.m.surowka@kancelariasurowka.pl. The law firm is based in Krakow (Cracow), Poland but provides services throughout the entire country.
Many people have heard of the criminal case resolution known as voluntary submission to punishment, but they may not fully understand what it entails. In this article, I explain, among other things: what VSP is and whether it is worth voluntarily submitting to punishment.
Czym jest dobrowolne poddanie się karze?
Dobrowolne poddanie się karze (a właściwie poddanie się skazaniu bez rozprawy), znane również jako DPK bądź depek, jest popularnym środkiem konsensualnego (polubownego) zakończenia sprawy karnej. Umożliwia ono skazanie oskarżonego w szybszym trybie, na posiedzeniu sądu, bez przeprowadzania rozpraw, przesłuchiwania świadków, etc. (art. 335 § 1 k.p.k.).
Ta forma postępowania może się kojarzyć z częstymi scenami z amerykańskich filmów prawniczych, w których sprawca przestępstwa dogaduje się z prokuratorem (DA – district attorney), negocjuje z nim warunki ugody, oferuje swoje przyznanie się do winy, a w zamian otrzymuje od prokuratora propozycję niższej kary. W naszym systemie prawnym do takiego skazania bez rozprawy może dojść, w telegraficznym skrócie, tylko wtedy, kiedy:
- występuje dobrowolne przyznanie się do winy ze strony sprawcy;
- wina sprawcy nie budzi wątpliwości;
- okoliczności popełnienia przestępstwa nie budzą wątpliwości w zestawieniu z wyjaśnieniami sprawcy;
- pokrzywdzony, na dalszym etapie postępowania, nie sprzeciwi się zastosowaniu tego rozwiązania (o czym szerzej na końcu tego artykułu);
- postawa oskarżonego wskazuje, że cele postępowania zostaną osiągnięte.
Do you need legal assistance?
What is Voluntary Submission to Penalty?
Voluntary submission to penalty (or rather submission to conviction without trial), also known as DPK or depek, is a popular method of consensual (amicable) resolution of criminal cases. It allows for the conviction of the accused in a faster procedure, at a court session, without a trial, witness testimonies, etc. (Article 335 § 1 Code of Criminal Procedure).
This form of procedure may be associated with frequent scenes from American legal movies, where the perpetrator of a crime negotiates with the prosecutor (DA – district attorney), discusses the terms of a settlement, offers a confession of guilt, and in return receives a proposal from the prosecutor for a lower sentence. In our legal system, such a conviction without trial can occur, in short, only when:
- the perpetrator voluntarily admits guilt;
- the guilt of the perpetrator is not in doubt;
- the circumstances of the crime are clear in relation to the perpetrator’s statements;
- the victim, at a later stage of the proceedings, does not object to the application of this solution (which is discussed further at the end of this article);
- the attitude of the accused indicates that the goals of the proceedings will be achieved.
Do you need legal assistance?
Voluntary Submission to Penalty – What is the Role of the Court?
A factor that ensures that the content of the agreement between the perpetrator and the prosecutor cannot be detached from the realities of the case is that the application for conviction without trial and the details of the agreement, such as the penalty, are reviewed by the court, which may condition its acceptance of the application on making changes to it (e.g., regarding the type or duration of the penalty), and in case of refusal, it may return the case to the prosecutor.
The court cannot unilaterally change the agreements made between the accused and the prosecutor. It can only encourage them to modify the terms or refuse to accept the application and return the case to the prosecutor. However, courts can make mistakes, and due to oversight, for example, the duration of the penalty might not be determined. If the court does not notice this oversight and fails to set the duration of the penalty, it may appear that the penalty was imposed for the maximum period, although this does not always align with the realities of the case.
For this reason, every verdict, including one issued as a result of DPK, should be reviewed by a competent person to determine the possibility or necessity of filing an appeal.
A very important element in the decision-making process, whether to admit guilt and enter into negotiations with law enforcement, should be considering the likelihood that the victim of the crime (e.g., someone who was beaten, a fraud victim, a person who was robbed, etc.) will not oppose the conviction of the accused under the terms agreed upon between the accused and the prosecutor.
If there is a strong conflict, resentment, or a desire for revenge between the alleged perpetrator and the alleged victim, it is highly likely that even relatively strict terms for the accused in the DPK will not be satisfactory to the victim. It is important to remember that the victim has the power to block conviction without trial (DPK) without providing a reason, even without objectively rational grounds. In such cases, the case is returned to the prosecutor, who will prepare the indictment for – it cannot be ruled out – a lengthy trial.
For these reasons, when preparing to submit an application for voluntary submission to penalty, it is advisable to also consider the needs of the alleged victim, for example, by offering compensation or restitution for the harm suffered, which can also be negotiated in terms of their scope.
It should also be noted that the legislator has provided a solution for the alleged perpetrator who has not reached an agreement with the prosecutor regarding the penalty during the preparatory proceedings, but would like, after the indictment has been submitted to the court, to influence the proceedings and possibly significantly shorten the process, as well as negotiate the penalties to be imposed. This “emergency solution” is available.
Specifically, under Article 387 § 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the defendant may, under certain circumstances, submit a request for the issuance of a conviction and the imposition of a specific penalty or measure even after the case has been submitted to the court. However, very importantly, starting from October 1, 2023, due to the amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure, even determining the details of the conviction with the court may be insufficient. With the trend of strengthening the prosecutor’s role in the process and increasingly restrictive regulations concerning the rights of the accused, the acceptance of our application currently also depends on the prosecutor’s consent (not just the absence of their objection, as was the case before). Therefore, it is essential to ensure the prosecutor’s presence at the hearing, which, under current laws, is not necessarily guaranteed.
SURÓWKA Law Firm professionally handles cases involving voluntary admission of guilt and submission to penalty as a means of most effectively serving the Client’s interests. Attorney Krakow Michał Surówka carefully analyzes the Client’s situation and then develops a solution aimed at ensuring the most optimal benefits in the context of the specific case. Clients working with our firm can be sure that their case is handled by a competent and fully committed lawyer.
As SURÓWKA Law Firm, we specialize not only in providing services in the field of business law Krakow, but also in areas such as:
Also read:
Do you need legal assistance?
For detailed information tailored to the specifics of a particular case occurring anywhere in the country, especially in the Małopolskie Voivodeship, with a focus on Krakow (Cracow), Poland as well as the Śląskie, Świętokrzyskie, or Podkarpackie Voivodeships, it is recommended to visit the Contact section.