Plea-bargaining, used in ninety percent of criminal convictions in the United States criminal justice system today is the exchange of prosecutorial and legal concessions for pleas of guilty. Generally, a defendant in a criminal trial will enter “one of three pleas: guilty, not guilty, or nolo contendere.” Nolo contendere, otherwise known as no contest has the same effect as a guilty plea, which means the defendant is convicted and accepts punishment but does not admit guilt (lawyers.com). But in the plea-bargaining process, which aims to avoid trial because of costs and time, a defendant and his or her defense attorney may negotiate with the prosecutor for one of four different bargains. In the first type of deal, the prosecutor may reduce …show more content…
Although the process is largely informal and lacks judicial input, the judge must approve the plea agreements. If the judge accepts the deal, the events to follow will go as stated, but if the judge denies an agreement then the defendant will be moved to a criminal trial proceeding. The reason behind the judge’s sole power in plea negotiations, according to the ABA a leading national legal organization is because judicial participation creates the impression in the mind of the defendant that they cannot receive a fair trial, lessens the ability of the judge to make an objective determination of the voluntary nature of the plea, and it may induce innocent defendants to plead guilty because they are afraid to reject the disposition desired by the judge. Also included in this decision making process is the prosecutor, the lawyer representing the state, who formulates and ultimately offers the deal to the defendant to receive a guilty plea in return. On the other side of the deal is the defense counsel who is expected to play an advisory role for the defendant to ensure he or she is fully aware of the nature of the plea bargain process and the guilty plea. The defense is not allowed to deceive his or her client into making a disadvantageous deal or fail to communicate all plea deals that were offered to the defendant. On occasion, the victim can …show more content…
After reviewing multiple plea bargain decisions and upholding the continuation of the negotiating process, the highest court of the land has provided six core rulings on the process beginning with the point that defendants are permitted to have defense counsel to protect from pressure and influence from the prosecutor. Next, the court has ruled that “pleas must be made voluntarily and without pressure”, yet prosecutors still threaten stiffer penalties to defendants if he or she is not accepting the plea at the current stage. The prosecutor and defense must keep their promised side of the deal even after guilt is admitted in court. In addition, the defendant’s due process rights are not violated when the prosecutor threatens to re-indict the accused on more serious charges and accepting a guilty plea from a person who claims their innocence is still considered a valid declaration of guilt. Finally, when accounts given by the defendant may be used against him or her at trial if the negotiations fail if the person admits to the crime during the bargaining process but later testifies that he or she did not commit the act and maintains innocence. These rulings are essentially mandatory guidelines for the process and help maintain the complexity of the controversial
A plea bargain is compliance between a prosecutor and defendant in which the accused offender agrees to plead guilty in return for some compromise from the prosecutor. The New Jim Crow, explains how most Americans have no clue on how common it is for people to be prosecuted without proper legal representation and are sentenced to jail when innocent out of fear. Tens of thousands of poor people go to jail every year without ever talking to a lawyer that could possibly help them. Over four decades ago, the American Supreme Court ruled that low-income people who are accused of serious crimes are entitled to council, but thousands of people are processed through America’s courts annually with a low resource lawyer, or no lawyer at all. Sometimes
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
The specifics of the system will be discussed, and finally, its limitations and suggested further research or development. The Nature of Plea Bargaining Plea bargaining describes a deal between the prosecutor and the defense attorney, who represents the defendant, that they negotiate a deal for either a lesser conviction or a lesser sentencing in exchange for the defendant to waive his/her sixth amendment rights. The defendant needs to plead guilty without contest, and forfeit his/her right to jury trial, therefore this can be considered a plea for a bargain of a better deal. Back in 1791, when the United States established the Bill of Rights, the 6th Amendment protects people’s rights to legal counsel, freedom from self-incrimination, and a fair, speedy, public trial.... ...
Plea bargaining is a tool used in the court system for the benefit and detriment of the accused for numerous reasons. Additionally, the Crown will use plea bargaining for their benefit as well. For the purposes of this paper I intend to focus on the benefits and risks for an accused person to accept a plea bargain.
A plea bargain is determined good for someone based only on their facts and conditions of their case. A disadvantage of plea bargaining is actually admitting the guilt (Understanding). Plea bargains appear to only benefit the criminal because they ultimately receive a lesser punishment. A plea bargain might seem good now but it could have permanent impact on your life. An innocent person would most likely not want to plead guilty but could feel the pressure from lawyers to enter a plea just to avoid a lengthy and costly trial. Even if the innocent person accepts a plea with no jail time, they will still have the conviction on their record. I believe all cases should go to jury trail regardless of the time and cost because in all fairness it is the nest shot at finding the true criminal and issuing the appropriate punishment. Shamim Ebrahimi’s advice regarding plea bargains is, “Focus on the big picture, and make sure you are aware of your options and possible collateral consequences because, remember, plea bargains almost always require a defendant to plead guilty on the record, and more often than not that record will follow you around for the rest of your life”
Pezdek, K. (2012, March). A Preliminary Study of How Plea Bargaining Decisions by Prosecution and Defense Attorneys Are Affected by Eyewitness Factors. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238136.pdf
There are many advantages and disadvantages when it comes to the accused plea bargaining. Plea bargaining happens when the accused pleads guilty to a crime and in return the prosecution agrees on a lighter sentence or reduced charges (Siegel, Schmalleger, Worrall, 2011). In some cases the prosecution agrees to both. There are many advantages to an accused plea bargaining. Some advantages includes saving the courts money, time, and resources. There are also disadvantages to plea bargaining. Some disadvantages is that prosecutors may charged the accused with a higher charge, non-guilty defendants may plead guilty, and defense attorneys not getting paid may talk their client into plea bargaining. Criminal who chose to plea bargain also are able to move through the court process faster and resolve their case sooner.
The National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals set a limit that each criminal defense attorney can take 150 felony cases per year, but “caseloads of 500, 600, 800, or more are common” (“Five Problems”). With that, criminal defense attorneys are forced to triage or reject cases, leaving potential clients to go to court without representation. If the defendant does have a public attorney, their defense is unprepared and vulnerable to make mistakes when working out a reasonable sentence. In one of his cases, Jones and his client accepted a deal with the prosecution for a three year sentence for stealing locks. Upon further investigation, the prosecution discovered that they made a mistake in calculating the minimum sentence – Jones’s client should have only served “366 days,” but it was already too late (Eckholm).
Plea bargains are one of the most controversial debates that are discussed over the criminal justice court system. A plea bargain is when a defendant agrees to plead guilty to a crime and in exchange for something, for example a lesser sentence. There are three types of plea bargains. Charge bargaining is when a defendant pleads guilty to a less serious charge than the original charge. Count bargaining is when the defendant pleads guilty for some of the charge, but not all. Sentence bargaining is when the defendants get a lesser sentence than the maximum penalty. Through the course of this semester it has been brought to our attention, multiple times, about the problems plea bargaining has caused. Many defendants are pressured by those who surround them in
One contradiction in the job of the prosecutor is that they have nearly limitless direction in critical matters; however, prosecutors’ are also held to a very high ethical standard. Prosecutors must screen cases to determine which ones need to be prosecuted; nevertheless, this is the source of controversy with most people. “What makes charging decisions more intriguing and controversial is the fact that in making this decision, the prosecutor has nearly limitless discretion” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). This means the prosecutor’s charging decisions are beyond any judicial review, so it must be apparent that a prosecutor
...caseloads, and more often than most realize they may plea-bargain a case that in fact should be prosecuted. I have no intentions of trying to judge their actions, simply because I truly appreciate the position they are in.”
6-9. When the litigants settle their case by compromise, let the magistrate announce it. If they do not compromise, let them state each his own side of the case, in the comitium of the forum before noon. Afterwards let them talk it out together, while both are present. After noon, in case either party has failed to appear, let the magistrate pronounce judgment in favor of the one who is present. If both are present the trial may last until sunset but no later.
Smith, C. E. (2004). Public defenders. In T. Hall, U.S. Legal System (pp. 567-572-). [Ebscohost]. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook
In Intro to Criminal Justice class, I had the opportunity to learn about the Criminal Justice System more thoroughly. I learned that there are three components that make up the Criminal Justice System such as the courts, law enforcement, and corrections. Each component has its own role in making sure the the Criminal Justice System is functioning properly. If one of these components are not efficient the Criminal Justice system will not be as strong as it could be.
In the criminal trial process charge negotiation provides the offender a choice to plead guilty or not-guilty, which is encouraged by the NSW DPP and is mentioned under the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 – Section 99. Charge negotiation usually involves receiving a lesser charge in exchange for a higher charge being withdrawn or could lessen the sentence. In the R v Perry [2011] the offender pleads guilty early in the case; which had effectively showed her remorse, her acceptance of responsibility for the crime and had saved the courts time and the costs that are involved in criminal trial cases; the victim Mr Gibson has been noted to after hearing the evidence and her plea the victim had conveyed to the crown that he had believed Ms Perry’s remorse was true and that he desired for her not to suffer lifelong consequences for the accident. With expenditure on criminal courts’ administration being roughly $570 million in the 2006-2007 year, with increasing numbers of offenders pleading guilty in the first instance the cost for criminal proceedings annually should slowly decrease therefore resulting in money being used in other avenues which would be more beneficial for the community. Having this option provides positive outcomes for all affected; the offender is in most cases rewarded for not wasting the courts time which can alter their sentence or