Plea Bargain

People have long debated whether plea bargaining is the best way to handle felony cases in the justice system. This article focuses on a reformed, institutionalized way to plea bargain. The author researches the King County Prosecutors rationalized approach to the way the Early Plea Unit handles their cases.

There are many advantages to plea negotiations/bargains. For instance, if there is not enough evidence against the defendant to convict them, a plea bargain can help the crown obtain a conviction. They are also good for spending less time and money on a trial in some cases. Lastly, because a plea bargain can help to

Ad hoc plea bargains typically involves some sort of an unauthorized form of punishment by the courts, and the criminal justice system. It’s said that these forms of bargaining are unreasonable and also unethical and unusual. Law professor and former judge Joseph Colquitt identifies examples of ad hoc plea-bargaining and identifies the forms they come in. First, of the court may impose an extraordinary condition of probation following a plea. Second, the defendant may offer or be required to perform some act as a quid pro for a dismissal or more lenient sentence. Third, the court may impose an unauthorized form of punishment as a substitute for a statutory established method of punishment. Forth, the state may offer some unauthorized benefit

There are three types of plea bargaining. The first type is, Charge Reduction, which is defined as where the prosecutor’s office may choose to file the most serious charge warranted by the facts and evidence. The second form of plea bargaining is, Removal of Charges. Which is

But while this revelation complicates and adds relevance to Rakoff's topic, he also asks “What's wrong with that?” – a variation of “so what?” In answer to this question, he says that plea bargains are “secret negotiations” that “invite[] arbitrary results.” Both innocent and guilty defendants, in other words, are placed in the same pot, and the goal is to achieve the appearance of fairness, not the realization of it. Considering ninety-seven percent of federal convictions are the results of guilty pleas (Rakoff), that is a haunting injustice.

Many people believe that plea bargains should be abolished because they see them as unconstitutional since plea deals take away a defendant’s constitutional right to a trial by jury. Accepting a plea bargain waives a defendant’s right to three of their basic rights protected by the constitution-the fifth amendment’s right against self-incrimination, the sixth amendment’s right to a trial by jury, and the right to confront hostile witnesses. The latter, has been made even more accessible by the 14th amendment which expands the sixth amendment not only to state courts, but also to federal

In this paper, I will discuss what is plea bargaining, the benefits, controversy, requirements, and roles of actors. Plea bargaining Is an agreement between a defendant and a prosecutor, in which the defendant agrees to plead guilty in exchange for an agreement by the prosecutor to drop one or more serious charges, reduce the charge to a less offense, or recommend to the judge a specific sentence. The benefits of plea bargaining are the following.

Pleas don’t come without drawbacks or dangers. Some fear that an innocent defendant may be pressured into a confession and plea out of fear of a more severe penalty if convicted. Another drawback is that some vicious criminals will get lenient treatment and get less than they deserve and be back out in a shorter time. “More than 90% of convictions come from negotiated pleas, which means that less than 10% of criminal cases result in trial.” This statistic starts to answer a question I had about our system. “What are the effects of plea bargaining in our courts and should there be more control over them?” The obvious effects are that fewer cases actually go to trial. With less cases

According to Timothy Sandefur’s In Defense of Plea Bargaining article, “a plea bargain is a contract with the state. The defense agrees to plead guilty to a lesser crime and receive a lesser sentence, rather than go to trial on a more severe charge where he faces the possibility of a harsher sentence.” We are also told in The New York Times Article; Federal Law on Sentencing is Unjust, Judge Rules that “about 97 percent of federal criminal convictions nationwide were the result of plea bargains.”

Those involved in the plea bargaining process include: the Government, the defendant, the victim, and the Judges. The Government holds an interest because the judicial system is one of the three branches, it would be a travesty if the judicial system stopped caring about its own courts. The defendant has a vested interest in the proceedings because the result will affect the rest of his/her life. It is ultimately the defendant's choice to plead guilty. On the opposite side of the spectrum the victim, or the victim's family, wants justice to be served. In some state courts the victim is allowed to directly take part in the plea negotiations, however this is also a point of debate. As for the judges, it is their responsibility to finalize and accept the plea deal, or reject it if it is not satisfactory or violates a statute. Plea bargaining has become an integral aspect of the criminal justice system, however, despite the popularity of its use it is imperative that it be under constant scrutiny and evolution. With that in mind there are three programs that will be evaluated; first the practices of the federal courts; second a smaller look at queens district, New York; and finally a closer inspection of a former Alaskan

Plea bargaining is used for a verity of reasons, from lessoning the case burden on the prosecutor to helping them win, what they felt was an unwinnable case. The most controversial part of plea bargaining is that it occurs in private, and is only between the defense and the prosecutor. By hiding the dealings behind plea bargaining prosecutors are able to make “wink wink” deals where they might lessen the charges for one of the defenses attorney’s clients and the defense will encourage another client to accept a deal from the prosecutor. One of the biggest problems with plea bargaining is that innocent people could be found guilty, because they feel coerced into accepting a plea, because if they go to trail (for a crime they didn’t commit) and are found guilty they serve a lot more time than they would have if they accepted the prosecutors

A plea bargain (“offer”) is an agreement in a criminal case whereby the prosecuting agency may offer the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty, usually to a lesser charge or to the original criminal charge with a proposal of a lighter than the maximum sentence. This opportunity allows defendants to avoid the risk of a conviction at trial on a more serious charge. This also allows all involved parties to keep the court’s calendars light without exhausting resources of a court, potential public defenders, and prosecutors who are all salaried for by the expense of tax payers. If every case in the criminal justice system went to trial, the courts would be so overloaded that they would effectively be shut down.

The use of plea bargaining has been prevalent in the modern Justice system throughout generations. It was not until the early twentieth century that its use became common and admissible in courts. During the early twenties the great experiment of prohibition came about, legally this resulted in the over criminalization of many laws, and saw the courts swell far beyond overcapacity. Although it's been legally used for over a hundred years, the plea bargain saw its real start begin with this massive influx of criminals. Throughout its early history the plea bargain was seen as a tool to buy freedom, lawyers and judges did not try and hide the price tag of a reduced scented, naturally it was used as a tool of corruption. Even after the end of prohibition the United States government searched to over

You know how sometimes you’re waiting in line, and the person a few spots ahead of you is in an argument with the cashier? It sucks. That one person is holding up the entire line just because they are incapable of coming to an agreement with the cashier. And now, because of them, your entire day is thrown off, simply because two parties could not reach a mutual agreement with each other. In a nutshell, this is plea bargaining. Imagine that the person a few spots ahead of you is a prosecutor and the cashier is the defendant in court. It is the exact same thing. Plea bargaining is a term used when the two parties reach a mutual agreement in a court of law. Usually it involves a little bit of give, and a little bit of take from both parties,

Plea bargain provides that flexibility necessary to make adjustments and produce substantive justice (Neubauer qtd. in McCoy 325).