Skip to main content

In a deposition, Is the defendant required to appear if the defendant has already entered a written confession?

Edwardsville, IL |

In a deposition, Is the defendant required to appear at the Plantiff's attorney's office if the defendant has already entered a hand delivered typed confession to the circuit clerk's office? The defendant does not feel it is necessary since they voluntarily submitted the document. Also, the document was signed by the defendant and stamped inside the the circuit clerk's office. Furthermore, the defendant does not understand the reason for the deposition since they met face to face with the Plantiff's attorney at the initial Conference Hearing. What would be the advantages or disadvantages to the having the defendant attend a deposition held by the Plantiff's attorney?

Attorney Answers 3


This sounds like a civil case, not a criminal case. Haveyou posted it properly?

Mark as helpful

4 lawyers agree


It rings of a civil case, but appear for the depo with your attorney and straighten it out.

Mark as helpful

2 lawyers agree


The Defendant is required to appear at the deposition. It may seem redundant given the fact that he has already met with the plaintiff's attorney and signed a "confession," but the deposition may be the only way the plaintiff can preserve his/her evidence in this case. The rules of evidence are complicated, and without seeing the document, I would probably say it is inadmissible. To answer your second question, the advantages of having a defendant attend a deposition are numerous. Not knowing the specific details of your case though makes it hard to discuss the actual purpose of the deposition or its strategic advantages.

Mark as helpful

1 lawyer agrees

1 comment



thanks Jeremy. The document in question was a signed confession based on the documents that were presented in the lawsuit Summons / Petition from the Plantiff's attorney. It basically was a response to the Plantiff's attorney which stated facts (signed by a Superior Judge) in which the Plantiff failed to make known. Better yet, the response was based on the fact that the Plantiff had her attorney to believe that my uncle had filed for bankruptcy when court records show that the Plantiff was the one that filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy in 2010. So in otherwords, the Plantiff is improperly stating facts to her attorney.

Criminal defense topics

Recommended articles about Criminal defense

What others are asking

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer

Browse all legal topics