Deferred prosecution
A deferred prosecution agreement (DPA), which is very similar to a non-prosecution agreement (NPA),[1] is a voluntary alternative to adjudication in which a prosecutor agrees to grant amnesty in exchange for the defendant agreeing to fulfill certain requirements. A case of corporate fraud, for instance, might be settled by means of a deferred-prosecution agreement in which the defendant agrees to pay fines, implement corporate reforms, and fully cooperate with the investigation. Fulfillment of the specified requirements will then result in dismissal of the charges.[2]
United States
Since 1999, the
According to professor Rachel Barkow and Anthony Barkow of NYU Law School,[7] there has been a dramatic increase in the use of DPAs and NPAs by federal prosecutors, increasing from 11 instances between 1993 and 2001, to 23 between 2002 and 2005, to 66 between 2006 and 2008. This kind of regulation-by-prosecutor has also occurred at the state level, for example at the New York Attorney General's Office under Eliot Spitzer and Andrew Cuomo.[7] Outside monitors are appointed in about half of all DPAs.[8]
Canada
Discussions about the potential establishment of
The legislation states that, in the case of Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, the prosecutor "must not consider the national economic interest, the potential effect on relations with a state other than Canada or the identity of the organization or individual involved."[12][9]
See also
- Adjournment in contemplation of dismissal
- Deferred Adjudication(term used within the State of Texas)
- Diversion program (deferred disposition)
- Plea bargain
References
- Boston University Law Review. 91 (1): 347–378., at 361 (DPAs are typically filed with a court whereas NPAs are not)
- ^ The American Heritage Dictionary of Business Terms. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. 2009. Archived from the original on 2009-09-02. Retrieved 2009-07-25.
- ^ "Corporate Prosecution Principles Resource Page". Federal Evidence Review. 2017-10-19. Archived from the original on 2017-10-19. Retrieved 2023-04-30.
- United States Attorneys' Manual § 9-28.1000 (2008) Collateral Consequences
- United States Attorneys' Manual § 9-16.325 (2008) Plea Agreements, Deferred Prosecution Agreements, Non-Prosecution Agreements and "Extraordinary Restitution"
- U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(f)(2012)
- ^ Main Justice. 2013-06-20. Archived from the originalon 2013-06-20. Retrieved 2023-04-30.
- ISBN 978-0-8147-8703-8.
- ^ a b Harris, Michael (February 15, 2019). "Why Wilson-Raybould Was Right". The Tyee. Retrieved February 18, 2019.
- ^ a b c d e Smith, Dale (June 4, 2018). "Bill aims to change way white-collar crime punished". Law Times. Retrieved February 13, 2019.
- ^ Joseph, Rebecca (February 13, 2019). "Charges against SNC-Lavalin explained — and how the PMO allegedly got involved". Global News. Retrieved February 13, 2019.
- ^ Branch, Legislative Services (December 18, 2018). "Consolidated federal laws of canada, Criminal Code". Retrieved February 18, 2019.