Plea Bargains : Criminal Justice System

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

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.

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.

People have long debated whether plea bargaining is the best way to handle felony cases in the justice system. This article focuses on a reformed, institutionalized way to plea bargain. The author researches the King County Prosecutors rationalized approach to the way the Early Plea Unit handles their cases.

In some cases, plea bargaining does not undermine our criminal justice system because the defendant should be allowed to weigh their options; especially because this plea will affect their lives. Pleading guilty to a lesser charge can benefit the defendant in multiple ways; such as, it can save them paying extensive lawyer bills or maybe they don’t wish to spend their whole life in jail. However, if the prosecutor or even the judge bullied and threatens the defendant into accepting the plea bargain; that action is undermining our criminal justice system. Our criminal justice system states that everyone is innocent until proven guilty and it is the responsibility of the state to prove one’s guilt. Yet in the case of Charles Gampero, Erma Faye Stewart, or anyone else mentioned in the documentary; either their lawyers or appointed judge were not even concern with the defendant’s innocence or guilt. Plea bargains should not be forced onto a defendant but given as an option, there is no need for threats or bullying; that action is what undermines our criminal justice system. This action—and also a statement made during the documentary—everyone who shows up in court is considered guilty

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.”

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

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

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.

When facing a DUI charge, you may have the option of pleading guilty to the crime in exchange for a smaller sentence. The process will involve filling out a form that identifies all of the rights that you are waiving in exchange for the reduced punishment. This includes being able to have a trial by jury, the ability to have any witnesses cross-examined, and your right to silence. This form will be reviewed with you by a judge, which is to ensure that you cannot claim you were not aware of the rights you gave up. You should know about the following things that happen by pleading guilty before you do so.

To conclude, Plea bargaining speeds up caseload disposal, this concept is more of a mechanism of convenience than an issue of legality, morality and constitutionality. By putting the concept of plea bargaining under judicial limelight there is a possibility of fair dealings in these bargaining’s. In todays time plea bargaining is a necessary component of the adversarial system. The successful implementation of this process depends on the corporation of all who are involved and concerned. In our countries courts are places of dignity and if we practice such a procedure it will make the courts look like markets, therefor it is necessary to strike a balance between justice, equity and efficiency and speed. It cannot solve all the problems, it

Guilty Pleas This emphasis on efficiency is not only evident through judicial behaviour, but also from the parties and legal counsel as seen through guilty pleas. Many defendants pled guilty, presumably to receive discounts and avoid the long waiting times, financial costs and stress of having their case heard. While these guilty pleas achieve cost and time efficiency as there is no need for police investigations, resources and magistrates, the absence of investigation into the case conceals miscarriages of justice and incarcerates many innocent individuals. Importantly, this further highlights the administrative issues underlying the criminal justice system and how individuals bear the costs of administrative defects.

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