This case study analysis focuses on one of two cases featured in the NPR story High Court Expands Defendant’s Plea Bargain Rights, March 2012.
In the case of Anthony Cooper, he was charged with assault with intent to murder. In March 2003 Mr. Cooper shot Kali Mundy four times. All four shots that hit Ms. Mundy were below the waist, she survived. Cooper was arrested and charged. The state of Michigan offered Cooper a plea bargain of 51-85 months if he pled guilty to Assault with Intent to Murder. On the advice of his lawyer, Cooper rejected the deal. His lawyer told him that Michigan law would not permit an attempted murder conviction for wounds that were below the waist. The lawyer was wrong. The lawyer was hoping that Cooper would receive
…show more content…
If a defendant has a lawyer that can not or does not provide accurate information or advice the defendant has the right to prove that they would have accepted the initial plea deal if given proper counsel. I personally feel that this is a fair and just ruling. Although the NPR story highlights just two cases, I am sure that inept advice is given to many people all over the country on a daily basis. If you can not rely on your appointed/hired defense attorney to give you sound and accurate advice, how can you navigate your case? Most people are not familiar enough with the intricacies of the law to make an informed decision about whether to go to trial or accept a plea bargain. It could be difficult to circumvent the people that were ‘rolling the dice’ by going to trial and now want the initial plea deal because they are unhappy with the outcome of the trial. This could be avoided by making sure all plea deals are presented in writing or in open court on the record, so you can be sure that the defendant is aware of the deal and that they understand the terms and conditions of it. If a defendant decides to go to trial they should sign a copy of any plea deals that were offered, so they know that these deals will be off the table unless they can prove some sort of negligence by their
Plea bargaining precludes justice from being achieved, where the consent to less severe sentences are given in favour of time and money. The case of R v Rogerson and McNamara, demonstrates the advantages of hiring highly trained legal personnel, which inevitably contributed to their lesser sentence. Thus, making it more difficult for offenders to be convicted.
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
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.... ...
Authors Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld founded the innocence project at a law school in New York City, which has assisted in the exoneration of an astonishing number of innocent individuals. As legal aid lawyers, they blithely engaged in conflicts that implicated
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”
... to 360 months in prison. This case was considered ineffective assistance of counsel for one reason, which was counsel prejudice advice to client to reject a plea offer. In order for Cooper to show his Sixth Amendment was violated, he would have to show three things: (1) The ineffective advice, and that the plea offer would have been present to the courts, (2) the courts would have accepted the terms, and (3) the conviction sentence would be less than the actual judgment and sentence imposed. The outcome in this case changed how the plea bargaining system works. Defendants in criminal proceedings have a Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel during plea negotiations meaning when the prosecutors offers a plea the defendant is entitled to be there so if he or she rejects the plea they know its actually coming from the defendant and not his attorney.
criminal justice system is considered to be adversarial and complex; that is there are two sides essentially competing for victory amidst a maze of multiple potential legal ramifications (Patton, 2013). Gideon was designed to ensure that every defendant involved in the process received a fair trial. Since the government hires lawyers to put defendants on trial, it is only fair that defendants receive legal representation in order to ensure the trial is balanced on both sides (Patton, 2013). The reality is that since the Gideon ruling, the number of cases going to trial has substantially decreased. In 1963, the number of federal criminal defense cases that went to trial was at fifteen percent. As of 2013, that number has dropped to 2.7 percent (Patton, 2013). This is not a reflection of an overall reduction in crime or an overall reduction in the number of charges found to have enough evidence to proceed to trial, but an increase in the amount of plea bargains (Patton,
Civilrights.org. (2002, April 13). Justice on trial. Washington, DC: Leadership Conference on Civil Rights/Leadership Conference on Civil RightsEducation Fund. Retrieved April 12, 2005, from Civilrights.org Web site: http://www.civilrights.org/publications/reports/cj/
6. Neubauer, D.W. (2002). America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice System. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth: Thomson Learning.
"Know the Cases." Innocence Project. Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, n.d. Web. 1 Mar 2011. .
Schmalleleger, F. (2002). Criminal Law Today: An Introduction with capstone cases. (2nd edition) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2011). America’s courts and the criminal justice system (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Garrett, Brandon. Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2011. 86. Print.
...Available By: Acker, James. Contemporary Justice Review, Sep2008, Vol. 11 Issue 3, p287-289, 3p; DOI: 10.1080/10282580802295625