Plea Bargain Analysis

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.

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

The negotiation was made for him to serve 12 days of incarceration and a fine of one thousand dollars. This is because his alcohol concentration was 0.08/0.09 in which he could not serve any less than 10 days. The law states this is a fair sentence for the defendant to serve. As a result, he would pay the consequences of his action. The amount seize of methamphetamine was small in which is conseder to be for personal use. For this charge in particular we would like it to be dismissed. We have presented the reality of this case your honor. Also, we would like for Mario go to therapy to help him get his life back. This is a man who has no priors and has been a roll model for the community. He understands the plea and agrees to

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.

The most essential features of our criminal justice system is bail, preventive detention, and plea bargaining. These three features are necessary for our criminal justice system to work the way it does. One of the most beneficial way, two of these systems benefit the criminal justice system, is by lessening the burden on prisons and jails, which are already over capacity. In some ways bail, preventive detention, and plea bargaining are seen as controversial and counterproductive to our criminal justice system, but are required to maintain an equality between safety, fairness and justice.

Most drug courts follow a similar model. The defendants entered in the program can come in through diversion, mental health courts or after they accept a plea to their charge.

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

The United States is plagued by the problem of mass imprisonment, with its prison population having risen by 500 percent in the last three decades. Because the overwhelming majority of criminal cases are resolved through plea bargaining, there is room for prosecutors to reduce mass imprisonment by exercising their wide discretion. At present, prosecutors likely do not give much consideration to the overcrowding of America's jails and prisons when making their plea bargain offers. However, if prosecutors were regularly advised of such overcrowding they might offer marginally lower sentences across the board. For instance, a prosecutor who typically offers a first-time drug offender a twenty-month sentence might instead agree to an eighteen-month

The plea bargain is a vital part of the criminal justice system today. Before the 1800s when an offender was caught there would be a trial and verdict. The plea bargain are for defendant 's to plead guilty to a lesser offense or to at least one charge especially if there are multiple indictments. Defendants will plead guilty in hopes of leniency, and at least 90 percent of criminal cases end in a plea bargains. A majority of criminal cases in many jurisdictions will end in a plea bargaining.

Plea-bargaining is known as a practice of negotiation where the prosecutor makes certain sacrifices and gives a lesser charge or sentence to the defendant in exchange for a guilty plea. Plea-bargains are done out of court, when one side begins to arrange a potential plea bargain. However the plea bargain does not go through until both the prosecuting side and the defense agree on it (Unconstitutionality). After both sides come to an agreement the plea bargain is brought before the judge, however the judge does not have to follow the prosecutor’s proposal. Some plea bargains may have to get the approval of the court before being upheld (Unconstitutionality). In plea bargains the defendants can plead guilty to some or all of the charges that

The use of plea bargains also allows for the acceptance of the character of the decision, and not just the fundamental of the composition. Altogether often, first lawbreakers are allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge, rather than suffering the full importance for an unplanned mistake in intelligence. On the exclusive, plea bargaining is not only a useful device, it is a necessary fundamental of our criminal authority organization.

Plea bargaining is sometimes referred to as “backdoor justice.” This is because plea bargains, which make up a vast majority of criminal proceedings, take place outside of the courtroom. They happen before or during a trial and sometimes the reasons are unknown to anyone not directly involved in the case. This tactic can work to the advantage of criminal defendants and their attorneys, but also presents certain problems, each of which will be addressed in turn. First, from a legal standpoint taking a plea bargain is a defendant waiving his right to trial which presents issue upon appeal. Second, plea bargains allow defendants to escape mandatory minimum sentences. Finally, outside of the legal realm, a defendant who accepts a plea deal is not

The purpose of a plea bargain is for the person being prosecuted to accept guilt. Plea bargaining is a nontrial procedure for sentencing and denouncing individuals blamed for genuine crime. A plea bargain waives his entitlement to trial in return for a more tolerant criminal punishment. According to Langbein (1978) the prosecutor instigates a criminal blamed to admit blame than would be forced if the denounced were mediated liable after trial. The prosecutor offers leniency either directly, as a charge lessening, or in a roundabout way, through the conclusion of the judge, as a suggestion for diminished sentence that the judge will take after. In return for getting this mercy for the charged, the prosecutor is soothed of the need to demonstrate the denounced's blame, and the court is saved adjudicating it. The court censures the blamed on the premise for his admission, without free settling (Langbein, 1978).

I believe that plea bargaining does serve a valuable purpose in our court systems. Plea bargaining assists Officers, Investigators, District Attorneys, and Witnesses from the prolonged process of the steps involved in going to a trial. In my own experience, I have seen witnesses have to come to court for hours, while missing work, just to see a preliminary hearing put off for another month or more. These processes take their toll on each person involved. I also believe that plea bargaining has to continue based on the system that we have in place. If we tried each case that comes through our court system, specifically in my jurisdiction, there is no way we would be able to provide enough attorney’s to conduct such a large quantity of trials.

The most important thing that happened to me this reporting period is that I was able to witness the plea bargaining process and hearing. This was the first time I was in the courtroom. I think it is very interesting how the process takes places. I did not necessary understand the language used in the hearing as it was a property case about the purchase of a radio station. However, it was still interesting to view how the defense attorney and the prosecutors interacted. In this case, I think the prosecutor did an excellent job of cross examining the witness. As we with the plea bargaining, the process was pretty much the same from case to case. It took approximately 15 to 20 mins per case. The defendant verified his identity, the prosecutor