Plea Bargaining In The Criminal Justice System

Calling Your Bluff: How Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys Adapt Plea Bargaining Strategies to Increased Formalization

A plea bargain is a negotiation between the defendant and their attorney on one side, and the crown prosecutor on the other side. A plea bargain may give the defendant a lightened sentence, in exchange for either confessing to some crimes, or giving information that is related to the offence, for example, the location of stolen goods or the names and locations of other participants, as well as their part in the offence.

It all starts with backed up courtrooms. A man is charged with killing another man. There is no evidence to convict this man of these charges. This leads the prosecutors to work out a plea-bargain. The pressure of other cases and the need for a guilty charge is what leads plea-bargaining to happen more every year. As a result many criminals get off easy and in return prosecutors look good for winning the case.

More than 90 percent of criminal convictions come from negotiated pleas, also known as, plea bargaining. Plea bargains are used every day at both the federal and state court level. They certainly have their “proponents” as well as their “opponents”. A plea bargain basically is any agreement in a criminal case between the prosecutor and defendant whereby the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a particular charge in return for some concession from the prosecutor. That agreement is usually in the form of a defendant pleading guilty to a “lesser” crime with a reduced sentence in return for the prosecuting authority not having to expend the time, energy, expense and manpower in seeking a conviction in a trial of a more serious charge. An evaluation of the evidence against the defendant is usually a significant factor by the prosecutor in determining whether or not a plea bargain should be offered. If the prosecutor’s case is strong, the chances of a plea bargain being offered to the defendant are lessened. While at the same time, if the prosecutor feels that his evidence is on the weaker side, the probability of a plea bargain being offered is enhanced.

When it comes to trials there is a great deal of uncertainty. There is no way to predict what a jury or judge will decide. A case that a lawyer thought would go one way could completely turn and do the opposite. This leads to the question of whether a case should be taken to trial or not. It is because of this that plea bargaining is often put to use. Plea bargaining is beneficial to the prosecutor as well as the defense attorney and the defendant. Plea bargains are based upon the mutual interest of all parties involved and they can occur for a variety of reasons.

Defendants can have their cases completed quickly, meaning guilty pleas can often be arranged within minutes while criminal trials can take days, weeks, or months. It is also beneficial for defendants because plea bargaining gives the defendant and prosecutor some control over the result decision. Plea bargaining not only benefits the defendants it also benefits attorneys because they can solve the case fast and do not need to prepare for trial and can work in other cases, also they get their fee quickly. Public defenders may reduce the large caseloads, and last but not least it keeps judges away from trials which consumes time.

Plea-bargaining has become crucial for courts and the justice system to effectively manage their caseloads. A defendant typically agrees to plead guilty to one or more charges well before a trial is slated to begin. The charge or charges the defendant often agrees to plead guilty to tends to come with a much lesser charged than what they were initially set to go to trial for. Plea-bargaining often allows for a quick resolution of cases where the evidence of guilt is overwhelming or where there is little disagreement.

Plea bargaining is when the defendant and prosecutor negotiate an agreement between each other where the defendant pleas guilty to reduced charges.

Plea bargaining and charge negotiation is an integral part of the criminal trial process, which achieves justice for offenders and society to a reasonable extent, but does little to achieve justice for victims. Within the criminal trial process, defendants have the choice to either plead guilty or not guilty. Charge negotiation achieves justice for offenders as it allows them to plead guilty to a lesser charge instead of pleading

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.”

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

By using Sanborns paper as a reference, it shows us that the concept of plea bargaining we use today has only been around for about 50 years. In these past 50 years, although still relatively new, plea bargaining has become such an incremental part in the court system. Within the last few years ir has especially picked up momentum. According to the Bureau of Justice statistics in 2003, scholars have drawn the conclusion that 90-95% of all trials were fixed by the process of plea bargaining (Devers, 2011). At that rate, it is not hard to imagine that eventually almost all of our court procedures will be carried out through this process. To put it into perspective, this means that 5% of all court cases actually go onto trial. Typically, plea bargaining is a relatively private process, but as always this is ever changing. Victims’ rights groups are starting to become recognized more and more, which leads to more input being given in the plea bargain process. How this affects the plea process is simple, more input means less flexible sentencing which can usually stall the negotiating process, prolonging an agreement between the two parties. The theory of plea bargaining is constantly shifting, with many viewers constantly trying to decrease the use of it.

An agreement made in a criminal case between a prosecutor and its defendant, before reaching a trial is a plea bargain. The prosecutor offers an opportunity to the defendant to plead guilty. By agreeing to plead guilty to a crime the defendant would in exchange get a prosecutor’s promise to convince the judge to reduce the sentence. It is really impossible to predict what a jury is going to decide in a trial. I personally think that plea bargaining is being used as an easy way out; instead of having the person who committed the crime pay for what they did by serving the whole time. By managing a plea bargain the terms can sometimes be used to include pondering on how it works and who it can help.