Washington D.C. Criminal Settlement Agreement

For some offenses, such as simple assault or misdemeanor harassment, prosecution may be deferred or declined if the complainant expresses no interest in pursuing charges. Although D.C. does not formally recognize “non-prosecution by agreement” as binding, prosecutorial discretion allows for complaint withdrawal to influence the outcome.

In felony or violent misdemeanor cases where prosecution proceeds regardless of victim consent, a good-faith settlement—especially with an executed release and restitution—may be submitted during plea negotiations or sentencing. D.C. Superior Court judges may weigh it as a mitigating factor, especially under voluntary Sentencing Guidelines.

If the alleged victim retains an attorney, all negotiations must occur through that attorney. Any attempt by a defendant or their legal team to contact the victim directly can violate court protective orders or ethical boundaries. Experienced criminal defense attorneys coordinate with opposing counsel to propose appropriate financial or non-financial terms.

Often, the defense has no direct way to contact the complainant—especially in cases involving multiple victims or sealed police reports. In such situations:

• During the police phase, the defense can submit an offer to the investigating officer, who may forward it to the complainant.
• At the prosecutorial stage, the defense may request victim outreach through the Assistant U.S. Attorney or utilize D.C. Superior Court’s Community Mediation Program.
• If the case is in trial posture, the defense can submit a “statement of intent to settle” via counsel to the victim advocate or through court-assigned mitigation specialists.

If the complainant refuses to accept a settlement, alternative measures must be considered. In D.C., filing a “good faith restitution submission” or placing restitution into a trust account for the court’s review can still carry weight. Judges may accept that the defendant made legitimate efforts toward resolution, particularly under §16-710 of the D.C. Code regarding civil liability and restitution acknowledgment.

A common issue is the victim withdrawing agreement after funds are transferred. To minimize legal ambiguity:

• Always use a written document signed by both parties.
• Include a waiver clause confirming the victim's full satisfaction and intention not to pursue criminal or civil action.
• Retain transaction receipts and make payments traceable (e.g., via cashier’s check or documented wire transfer).

This ensures that even if the victim later recants, the court can evaluate the nature of the agreement independently.

In D.C., attempting to negotiate settlement without professional oversight may backfire. Any actions perceived as pressuring or intimidating the victim can lead to additional charges such as witness tampering (D.C. Code §22–722). Hence, defendants should avoid direct outreach or financial offers unless processed legally through counsel.

A well-structured agreement should contain:

• Names of parties and their legal counsel
• Clear payment terms, amounts, and purpose (e.g., restitution vs. emotional harm)
• Confirmation of satisfaction and release of claims
• Date and witness signature

Even if the agreement does not bar prosecution, it may influence how the court and prosecutor approach the case.