The Importance of Plea Bargaining in Criminal Trials Essay

Plea bargaining is when the defendant and prosecutor negotiate an agreement between each other where the defendant pleas guilty to reduced charges.

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.

One of the main problems with mandatory minimums is that they allow prosecutors to be involved with

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).

Like many procedures in the criminal justice system, plea-bargaining has its pros and cons. The biggest advantage of plea-bargaining is the management it has on caseloads by weaning less significant cases out or reducing the amount of time that would be spent at a trail. The process decreases the prosecutor’s workload by letting them prepare for more serious cases. Along side reducing workloads, it also eliminates the cases’ uncertainty. It helps defendants with making sure they will not receive more serious charges for the criminal acts filed against them. Plea-bargaining also does not allow for the cases to get worse than it already is, in a sense it puts the case on pause. When a charged individual takes a plea bargain, the suspect will not be required to go through trial. This can be an advantage and disadvantage at the same time considering that crimes and damning evidence may never be discovered. By doing all of the things mentioned above, plea-bargaining allows for the justice system to figuratively take a breath. If all cases made it to a trial by jury, then the justice system would be simply overloaded and would not be able to sustain themselves and stay afloat because courts would be back up for years. Taking a look at the disadvantages: plea-bargaining can lead to poor case preparation and investigations. Some attorneys and judges often argue that plea bargains had led to attorneys not taking time to properly prepare their case, which also results in poor police investigations. It might also allow prosecutors to take full advantages of accepting criminal acts in the weakest trials, it could be considered biased to a prosecution party. An innocent individual also stands the chance of

When it comes to trials there is a great deal of uncertainty. There is no way to predict what a jury or judge will decide. A case that a lawyer thought would go one way could completely turn and do the opposite. This leads to the question of whether a case should be taken to trial or not. It is because of this that plea bargaining is often put to use. Plea bargaining is beneficial to the prosecutor as well as the defense attorney and the defendant. Plea bargains are based upon the mutual interest of all parties involved and they can occur for a variety of reasons.

Plea bargaining and prosecutorial discretion are two crucial components in criminal procedure. The prosecution has leverage over which charges they wish to pursue against a defendant, while the defendant has the choice of adjudication of guilt. Being that time is a critical factor, each party has to weigh the pros and cons before making any decisions. The prosecution aims to enforce the harsher punishment where more time is served, whereas the defendant intends on serving the least time possible. Both subjects use strategically approaches that best benefit their party.

The entire plea bargain system has glaring issues of fairness, morality, and process. It needs an overhaul. Plea bargains are a way to “get rid” of some cases due to the sheer number of cases in the judicial system. There are not enough resources for most cases to reach trial. Innocent defendants are often pressured and coerced into accepting plea bargains. Prosecutors create uncertainty among defendants by aggressively handling each individual each often making threats that they can not actually back up. While this is fairly effective, it is not fair to the defendants. Additionally, it more time is spent on strategy and games then on discovering the truth. However, no case should receive biased treatment. Prosecutors sometimes blatantly

Plea bargaining has become the way the American justice system operates. Prior to plea bargaining jury courts were mostly run by the judge and the prosecutor. In this particular setting the defendant defended himself and spoke directly to the jurors. The prosecuting attorney, if there was one needed, presented the case and the judge ensured procedural protocols were followed (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worrall, 2015, p. 310). Plea bargaining is known as far back as the nineteenth century, of course not as depth as today’s plea bargaining.

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.

There are many ways of resolving the criminal cases as defined in the current criminal justice system. One of this ways is through the use of pleas bargain. Plea bargain happens way before the trial and occurs when defendant accepts the wrong doing. He or she can plead guilty of the crimes or changes where they get to accept lenient sentence that can even lead to dismissal of charges (Lippke, 2011). This is however a private process though it is being taken over by advocacy groups.

Posed with the question as to whether or not I believe plea bargaining serves a purpose in the American Criminal Justice system, I answer affirmatively. Plea bargaining results in the disposition of “…approximately 95% of all criminal cases…” (Bohm & Haley, 2014, p. 11) in an overloaded criminal justice system where cases oftentimes take years to resolve. Additionally, I believe plea bargaining should continue to be allowed, as it is a valuable tool that can be used to expedite cases through the criminal justice system (Bohm & Haley, 2014). Griffiths (2008) argues the possibility of the defendant receiving a reduced charge and/or a lighter sentence, less publicity and embarrassment for the defendant and his/her family, and less financial resources

In many cases like the previous the influence of the attorney and the means of counsel is a big factor in the accepting or declining of a plea deal. The Sixth amendment right, given to all who inhabit this country is the right to counsel is in many sense inadequate. The juvenile offenders are assigned an attorney; an attorney that they believe has their best wishes at mind. Many are unaware that the attorney they may receive has 4 times more than the federally recommended caseload for a defender. (Polakow-Suransky, 2002) The time the juvenile offenders spend with their attorney is average 10 to 12 minutes. After their first 10 to 12 minute counsel meeting more than 50% of juvenile offenders please guilty for their plea deals. A large issue is the defense these juveniles are receiving. The defenders are often excruciatingly over worked and vastly underpaid. Over time this leads to the lack of commitment and devotion for the cases of criminal court. The defenders spend little time even concerning themselves with the youth’s or their crimes and there is very little a teenager with no means of income can do about it. The lack of money in juvenile law seems to do the opposite of push juvenile defenders to do anything beyond the baseline. The results of these conditions are the substantial number of juveniles who sign or give away their rights with barley any counsel. The juvenile system is basically taking every with two alternatives in mind, getting them out or getting them in.

Two men have plead guilty in the shooting of Wiz Khalifa's uncle, Imani Porter who was killed January 2014 in a drug deal gone bad.

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