Plea Bargaining Case Study

Over the years plea bargaining has become the way for the Administration of Justice in America and Canada’s criminal trials. Accused criminals are giving up the rights to a fair trial, to indeed plead guilty, in order to receive a much lesser charge, more comfortable prison, or even to agree to testify against someone else. Fewer than ten percent of criminal cases brought up by the federal government even make it to the federal courts to be tried before juries each year. “According to one legal scholar, every two seconds during a typical workday, a criminal case is disposed of in an American courtroom by way of a guilty plea or nolo contendere plea” (Lynch, par. 1). Which ultimately means more than ninety percent of criminal cases are

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.

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

The plea bargaining process is no stranger to the justice system. The issue of plea bargaining has been subject to never-ending debate as to whether or not this system is still viable. Some believe that we should abolish this system of plea bargaining. Plea bargaining is criticized for failing to take into account the victims’ desires. Rampant is the belief that people are not being properly punished for their crime and, as such, leads to a diminished respect for the criminal justice process. Others believe that the plea bargaining system is necessary in order to prevent overwhelming case loads for the justice system and it also helps save court time and money by resolving cases early on in the criminal process. It can also help secure a conviction if it is unclear if there is enough evidence for the accused to be found guilty of his or her crime. Despite some of its limitations raised by critics, we should not go so far as to demand the abolishment of plea negotiations. The plea bargaining system is a necessary evil. While the system of plea bargaining is indispensable, it is important to note that the plea bargaining process in Canada is far from perfect. Thus, suggestions will be recommended for a reform of the process of plea bargaining. Directions for future research will be discussed as well.

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.

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.”

Plea bargains have been a fundamental part of the United States justice system since the late 1800’s history.com. From the time the plea bargain was implemented, its constitutionality has been questioned. Although the arguments against plea bargains are justified, plea bargains are the best option for the time being. Removing plea bargains would resolve various issues in the United State’s modern justice system, but the complications resulting from such a change would be simply overwhelming.

It's so effective because the prosecution has the unique opportunity the use a defendant's physcology against them. Prosecutors understood the threat of a harsher sentence, made their deal almost impossible to refuse. In the case of Brady v. United States, the threat of the death penalty was used as a tool of coercion. The case centered around brady, a man accused of kidnapping, who pleaded guilty after the threat of the death penalty was made, and his co defendant's testimony against him, he later appealed his case to the Supreme Court. His argument was that a threat of death was considered coercion, and the prosecution used it to illicit a guilty plea. The court decided against Brady, the confession was not forced, and he understood his right to a trial and due process. From cases like Brady v. United States, the courts saw plea bargaining as not only constitutional but necessary. This further solidified its popular use in courts, and as a result we have the legal system we know today. If a confession is not forced, it's deemed

One believes that many cases it could be possible that defendant is not guilty and can be sentenced for a crime he or she did not commit. For example, in the case of Kalief Browder who did not take the plea deal because he knew he was not guilty. Some of the critics are that plea bargaining reduces society's interest in appropriate punishment meaning peoples or criminals would be likely to commit a crime because they might think they would offer a plea deal and not be sentenced to the right amount according to the charges. People believe that judges and prosecutor go for the plea bargaining because it reduces the amount of work they need to

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

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

Brittany, I agree that there is good and bad that comes from bedsheeting and plea bargaining. However, it seems as though the government receives more of the good from the tactics, as citizens receive more of the bad from the tactics. Regarding the good, you mentioned plea deals reduce the strain upon the judicial system by reducing the number of trials that must occur. In addition to that, they assure a conviction, which looks good for the prosecutor, and lighten their caseload (Levenson, 2013). As for the defendant being overcharged, accepting a plea bargain provides them the opportunity for a lighter sentence on a less severe charge, and fewer or less serious offenses listed on their criminal record. For the defense attorney’s, they get to do less work and still get paid the same amount of money. For the correctional system, a plea deal may reduce the amount of inmates entering a facility as jail time can be suspended as a condition of the plea bargain (Levenson, 2013).

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.

Essay 2: The Plea Bargain If you were accused of a crime that you did not do would you fight for your innocence or perhaps take a plea bargain? One’s first instincts may be to have faith that the justice system will find you innocent but this is not always the case and many accused people end up taking a plea bargain. A plea bargain or plea agreement is defined by Verdun-Jones (2016) as “an agreement by the accused to plead guilty in return for the prosecutor’s agreeing to take or refrain from taking a particular your of action” (p. 169), to illustrate one may take a plea bargain to have a shorter sentence. This essay is going to explore why it may be better for a plea bargain to be discussed in an open court in front of a judge but also what problems this might cause and finally whether or not a victim should have

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.