If the defendant is not involved for a preliminary hearing, waives oral proceedings or does not request a preliminary hearing, the case is made available. If the court finds that the evidence presented is not sufficient to support the indictment or if an application for a decision without substantial consideration of a case is filed in violation of the requirements of Georgia`s Code of Criminal Procedure, it must refer the case to the Crown. The court before the case is returned to the Crown offers the parties to amend the terms of the agreement. If the amended conditions do not comply with the court, then he will return the matter to the prosecutor`s office. (Article 213 of Georgia`s Code of Criminal Procedure). As a general rule, a judge will approve a plea case, if the accused voluntarily waives his or her right to a trial, the accused understands the charges, the accused understands the maximum sentence he or she could receive after PLEADING guilty, and the accused makes a voluntary confession to the court to make the alleged crime. Even if an accused agrees to plead guilty, a judge may refuse to accept the admission of guilt and oral arguments if the charge or charge has no basis. In accordance with Article 217 of Georgia`s Code of Criminal Procedure, the prosecutor is required to consult the victim and inform him before the end of the plea. In addition, under the instructions of the Georgian Crown, the prosecutor is required to consider the interests of the victim and, as a general rule, to enter into the plea contract after compensation for the damage. John H. Langbein argues that the modern American advocacy system is comparable to the medieval European torture system: in Canada, courts always have the final say on sentencing. Nevertheless, oral arguments have become an accepted part of the criminal justice system, although judges and crown counsel are often reluctant to characterize it as such. In most Canadian criminal trials, the Crown has the option of recommending a lighter sentence than it would seek after a guilty verdict in exchange for an admission of guilt.
 Theoretical work based on the prisoner`s dilemma is one of the reasons why pleadings are prohibited in many countries. The inmate`s dilemma is often the same: it is in the interest of both suspects to confess and testify to the other suspect, regardless of the accused`s innocence. The worst case is probably when only one party is guilty: here, the innocent has no incentive to confess, while the guilty is strongly encouraged to confess and testify against innocent people (including false statements). [Citation required] The accused may also benefit from oral arguments. Advocacy agreements provide quick relief from the fear of prosecution because they shorten criminal proceedings. In addition, pleas generally give defendants less punishment than they would if they were convicted of all counts after a full trial. Suppose, for example, that an accused has been charged with driving under the influence and an accused of possession of a controlled substance intending to sell. If the accused goes to court and is convicted of both counts, he could be sentenced to several years in prison.
However, if the prosecutor agrees to plead guilty to sell the possession charge with intent, the prosecutor may drop the charge of driving under the influence. The end result would be a slightly shorter prison sentence than would result from the inclusion of the other census. Under the same agreement, the prosecutor may also agree to reduce the remaining charge in exchange for something from the accused.