The policy of division requires transparency and honesty in sentencing; Federal prosecutors are expected to identify departures for the court if they agree to support them. For example, it would be inappropriate for a prosecutor to accept that a departure is acceptable, but to conceal the agreement in an indictment agreement presented to a court as a fait accompli, so that there is no recording or forensic verification of the departure. Judges are not required to impose a sentence in the context of a joint filing and failure by a judge to comply with a joint filing is not in itself a reason for the judgment to be amended on appeal. However, if a judge did not routinely comply with common complaints, that judge would impair the Crown`s ability to provide reasonable inducements to plead guilty to accused persons. Defense lawyers would be reluctant to make joint registrations if they were deemed invaluable with a particular judge, leading to otherwise avoidable trials. For these reasons, Canadian judges normally impose a sentence in the area of a joint deposit. [30] Commentary. JM 9-27.400 authorizes the decision on federal criminal complaints, in accordance with the pleading agreements between the accused and government counsel. These negotiated decisions should be distinguished from situations in which an accused pleads guilty or does not claim unless there is any charge of information or charge if no agreement has been reached with the government. Only the previous type of order is covered by the provisions of JM 9-27.400 et seq. Commentary. .