Plea Agreements: Case Study

Ms. Bowen states in her article that all authors reviewed agree that, “plea bargaining under an imbalanced system does not achieve justice, much less arrive at something that resembles empirical or legal truth, institutionalized plea bargaining best resembles the criminal justice system’s

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.

My favorite article from section III is article 11 Adapting to Plea Bargaining: Prosecutors by Milton Heumann. The reason I like this article the best is because it talks about and shows the perspectives of new prosecutors about plea agreements. That the aspect of plea bargaining are quite similar to that of new prosecutors and defense attorneys. I like how the author included illustrations of questions from an older prosecutor to the answers to a newly appointed prosecutor. I believe what Heumann tried to make valid in this article is that new prosecutors take into account that plea bargaining is a worthwhile service. I think the author did a lot of assuming in this article rather that teaching the material to his readers. Advantages to

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.

Around 90% of all cases are resolved in a plea bargain. A plea bargain is when a prosecutor offers the defendant a lesser sentence if they plead guilty. A bargain will often be accepted if the defendant does not think they can win the case or does not have any compelling evidence. Plea bargains do not happen in court rooms. As depicted in the movie, plea bargaining can happen anywhere. For example, at around the 50-minute mark, Jack Ross offers Daniel Kaffee a plea of involuntary manslaughter outside the basketball court. Plea bargaining is one of the few court actions that do not happen in a court room.

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.

Rebecca, I agree with your response regarding plea bargaining. I don’t believe plea bargaining is wrong, because one of the goals of the judicial system is to ensure justice is served. I feel as though plea bargaining works best for small cases, such as theft, where a victim may or may not have been involved in the crime itself. As for major cases, I feel as though the defendant shouldn’t be pressured into pleading guilty for a lighter sentence. The accused should exercise their constitutional rights and remain innocent until proven guilty. Although this may be time consuming and costly, I believe citizens in the community and possibly the victim may feel as though justice was served after going through the judicial process. Reason being is

Although many people may not like or appreciate the Plea bargaining clause in the criminal justice system but I think the plea bargaining is a good thing because it helps the criminal justice system to be processed more faster by helping the judges to get rid of numerous of case loads. If it wasn’t for plea bargaining, it would probably take criminals a longer time to appear before judges, which would lead the victims to wait for a longer time to see or gain justice. With that say, plea bargaining is a big helps to the criminal justice system, which I think that promote more good than bad regardless to which degree it results. In the meantime, when confronted with the choice to plea to a lesser charge in return for certain but less severe

In the United States, plea bargaining seems to determine the fate of criminal defendants, rather that trials. This is true in federal cases, but specifically in drug cases. An estimated three percent of federal drug defendants actually go to trial (Fellner). Also, according to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, 50% of inmates are in federal prison for drug offenses. Of those in prison for drug offenses, evidence has shown that “defendants convicted of drug offenses with mandatory minimum sentences who went to trial received sentences on average 11 years longer than those who pled guilty (215 versus 82.5 months)” (Fellner). Harsh sentences for drug offenses has fueled climbing federal prison population since the anti-drug effort began in the mid-1980s.

While plea bargaining proposes plenty of advantages through the court of law in America and Canada, it shows some disadvantages as well. First off, plea bargaining seems unlawful to many. Every American is entitled to a right to a fair trial by the court of law. Giving the opportunity to plea bargain is taking away from those constitutional rights. Defendants

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

I believed when the idea of plea bargaining was implemented it was done with great intentions to ensure that the accuser was held accountable for his/her actions and simultaneously avoiding the uncertainty of a trial. My view on plea bargaining is that I can see the benefit and the flaws of both side. For the intent it was created it was beneficial “In New York, for example, statistic from 1839 showed twenty five percent of convictions resulted from guilty pleas. Ten years later, the rate of guilty pleas climbed to forty percent (Guidorizzi)”. As time went on the benefit factor of it was no longer viable because plea bargaining was overused and misused, when the numbers rise from twenty-five percent to forty and continued to rise it no longer was an alternative to tough cases but instead it was used as tool to dispose of criminal cases. The positive side of plea bargaining is the guarantee that the accuser will be held accountable for his actions. If both side is unsure at his chance of success and have uncertainty regarding the outcome if the case goes to trial than both side could come to an agreeable agreement to plea bargained. A negative aspect of plea bargaining is that it allows for criminal to get away with lenient sentences. The more severe negative aspects of plea bargaining is the opportunity it creates for coercion of innocent defendant to plead

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.”

Despite the fact that many people believe that the criminal justice system is similar to TV crime shows like CSI, Criminal Minds, and Law and Order, the real criminal justice system does not work in such a way as it portrays in these shows. For example, on these crime shows, most cases get solved and are brought to justice via a court trial. Nonetheless, in reality many cases are solved in a plea bargain. Plea bargaining is one of the most controversial issues in the United States. The practice of plea bargaining is necessary due to fact of the high crime rates, and lacking facilities and staffs to try all cases. First of all, let’s find out what is the plea bargaining? Plea bargaining is an arrangement between a prosecutor and a defendant

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.