What Are The Pros And Cons Of Plea Bargaining

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

Based on the charged presented to someone a plea bargain, no matter how unusual may sound appealing. For example, if an individual was stop for speeding one night and was later found to be driving under the influence they could be charged with an OUI. Lets say this is not this persons first OUI and due to this being a recurring offence they will be facing jail time and a loss of license. After the individual was arrested their vehicle was searched and a large amount of money was found in a bank sleeve. In this instance the prosecutor offers, no jail time, and suspension of the license for 30 days opposed to year in exchange for the cash found in the vehicle. This would be an example of ad hoc plea-bargaining. It’s unethical perhaps for the prosecutor to suggest the defendant surrender his money to the state to receive a lighter sentence, however if the defendant does not with to do jail time and not having a license for an extender period of time could be devastating to them. Ad hoc plea-bargaining can also be exchanged in the other direction, from the defendant to the

9. Plea Bargaining: The defense attorney and prosecuting attorney discuss a possible guilty plea in exchange for lighter sentence but they can’t come to an agreement so a trial will proceed. The prosecuting attorney doesn’t want to negotiate a settlement.

Plea Bargaining: This is where the criminal pleads guilty for a reduction of sentencing from the prosecution.

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.

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.

Plea bargains are the result of a collaboration between the prosecutor, defendant, defense attorney and judge. The prosecutor, who represents the state and determines the punishment of the crime, will usually offer the plea bargain to the defense attorney. The defense attorney then explains to his or her defendant the

Innocent people are being accused of crimes and confronted with these plea bargains that only offer two very difficult choices, guilty or innocent. People are then intimidated by the prosecutor’s list of multiple charges and lengthy sentences which creates fear in many individuals, especially those who are ignorant of the law. This fear coerces defendants to plead guilty because they want to get out as quickly as possible and put this behind them. It is this coercion that creates the controversy in plea bargains. These deals were initially meant to speed up the court process while cutting offenders some slack. But they have now turned into a quick method for the prosecutor to secure convictions resulting in the spread of

Plea bargaining may have advantages in America’s and Canada’s Justice System, but it also proposes an advantage for the accused criminal. It gives the defendant the opportunity to reduce sentence and provide a better, more comfortable stay in correctional facilities. It gives the opportunity for guilty criminals, who know a guilty sentence will be there if facing a jury, to plead guilty to the case for one’s own benefits. Rather than spending time presenting a losing case in front of a judge and jury, and losing plenty of money in court fees, the case can be wrapped up in a matter of agreement. Guilty defendants seem to be in a win-win situation and can use plea bargaining as a total advantage.

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.

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.