Plea Bargaining Essay

Ad hoc plea bargains typically involves some sort of an unauthorized form of punishment by the courts, and the criminal justice system. It’s said that these forms of bargaining are unreasonable and also unethical and unusual. Law professor and former judge Joseph Colquitt identifies examples of ad hoc plea-bargaining and identifies the forms they come in. First, of the court may impose an extraordinary condition of probation following a plea. Second, the defendant may offer or be required to perform some act as a quid pro for a dismissal or more lenient sentence. Third, the court may impose an unauthorized form of punishment as a substitute for a statutory established method of punishment. Forth, the state may offer some unauthorized benefit

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

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

Without out plea bargaining, courts and jail would be overcrowded, unorganized and forced to shut down. Moreover, people willing to accept their crimes and take punishment are rewarded with lesser sentences, saving everyone’s time, while still serving

In the case of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a law may not punish a status; i.e., one may not be punished to being an alcoholic or for being addicted to drugs. However, of course, one may be punished for actions such as abusing drugs. The question becomes; What if the status “forces” the action? What if a person, because of his/her addiction to drugs, is “forced” by the addiction to purchase and abuse the illegal drugs? Would punishing that person be unfairly punishing a status?

I believe that plea bargains are very important to the U.S. criminal justice system. Without having plea bargains our criminal justice system would be

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

In all, plea bargaining serves various functions; nonetheless, the main purpose of plea bargaining is to improve “the administrative efficiency of the courts” (Wheatley 1974 in Goff, 2014, pg. 261). For instance, with plea bargaining, the courts can quickly garner a plea of guilty, and thus, a sentence can be provided for the accused, rather than attempt to prove the guilt or innocence of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition, Ken Chasse (2011) identifies other advantages of plea bargaining such as cost-saving, no consequences for violating the law and constitutional rights by the courts since the matters of plea bargaining are not reviewable (pg. 1). Furthermore, the “sentence can be known beforehand… [, and thus,] victims can be consulted more precisely about the outcome before sentence is imposed”, disclosure and discovery will not be known, “no trial errors” or reversals of the outcome by appeal courts, and both sides can also claim victory (Chasse, 2011, pg. 1).

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.

Plea bargain provides that flexibility necessary to make adjustments and produce substantive justice (Neubauer qtd. in McCoy 325).

Judicial discretion was prevalent over the first half of the last three decades, but has been regulated by legislature since 1984. Discretion by definition is the authorization of deciding as one thinks fit, absolutely or within limits (Ntanda, 1999). Indeterminate sentencing, traditionally, has afforded judges considerable discretion over the resolve of criminal sentencing. “While such discretion theoretically allows judges to tailor sentences to the circumstances of individual crimes and criminals, thereby achieving a sort of ex post fairness, it also permits variation in sentences that may not be warranted by the observable facts of the case, reflecting instead the judge’s own preferences” (Miceli, 2008, p.207). The punishment

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.

The leniency in sentencing can be shown by examining a few larger publicized cases of white-collar crime. One of the most iconic examples of white-collar crime is Jordan Belfort. Belfort started a business in the 80 's called Stratton Oakmont that was a “Long Island penny-stock boiler room he ran." However, Belfort’s business was not making its money legally. It turns out that they laundered money and manipulated stock prices. In 2003, Belfort pled guilty to money laundering and securities fraud. The government has claimed that he defrauded people out of more than $200 million. However, he only received a four-year sentence, of which he served 22 months. For the amount of damage that Belfort inflicted, it seems unjust that he received such a short sentence. Belfort stole $200 million from people, yet, he only spent about a month in jail for every $10 million he stole. Public perception would interpret his sentencing as indicative of a problem with leniency in white-collar crime sentencing. However, there were extenuating circumstances. Jordan Belfort made a plea bargain with the FBI. Plea bargains are “agreements between defendants and prosecutors where defendants agree to plead guilty to some or all of the charges against them in exchange for concessions from the prosecutors[…] some plea bargains require defendants to do more than simply plead guilty.” Jordan Belfort received such a light sentence because he

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.

It has been understood that many successful criminal prosecutions in the United States end not with jury trial, rather yet plea bargain. Plea bargains are agreements between prosecutor and defendant, where the defendant agrees to plead guilty in order to receive a lesser offence or sentence. “The mode of plea-bargaining is most closely associated with high volume, low-stakes cases like misdemeanors and low grade felonies, as well as cases in which the prosecutor and defense lawyer have a good relationship and a long history of past dealings,”(O’Hear,2008). Throughout the following report I will be creating a scenario as a prosecutor proposing a plea offer alongside with a role of defense counsel and preparing a counteroffer