Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What are the arguments against plea bargaining
Plea bargaining assignment
Effectiveness of plea bargaining
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: What are the arguments against plea bargaining
The institution of plea bargaining appeared for the first time in the United States of America, in the early twentieth century, for pragmatic reasons - to facilitate the work of courts. Criminal hearings started to become long and tedious, especially since the late nineteenth century. Given the circumstances, practitioners could not resolve all cases through a "full trial", ie a process in front of jurors, and so they started to look for alternative solutions. The institution of plea-bargaining of has raised many controversies all over the world where was implemented, (in Italy is known as pattegiamento and is France is called plaider-coupable) the most heated ones can be found in the U.S., where an author has described it as a total disaster.
During the twentieth century, the recognition of guilt became an essential element of criminal proceedings, both at the federal level and in different states. "Plea bargaining" is based on the considerable growth in recent decades of the principles that take into account the will of the defendant. In the U.S., more than 90% of convictions are based on this type of admittance (Ross, 2006). Recognition of culpability attracts a negotiation between prosecution and defense. Thus, in exchange for recognition, the defendant obtains from the prosecutor a review of the crime or the promise to recommend leniency to the judge.
One of the objections to this institution was that the adversarial principle is violated, this being a fundamental principle of criminal proceedings. But bear in mind that this principle should not be exercised the same in all cases, as simple cases where the facts have been recognized cannot be treated the same way as the most complex cases, where the defendants have not admi...
... middle of paper ...
... fill this defect. In the United States, this rule is praetorian.
As already presented, plea bargaining has both advantages and disadvantages. In a judiciary system that is overcrowded and where cases take months and even years to be solved, this institution is a great solution. Of course, limits must be imposed. As presented, the California low is a good example of limits imposed to this institution.
Works Cited
Grossman GM, Katz ML (1983), Plea bargaining and social welfare, The American Economic Review
Ross JE, (2006), The Entrenched Position of Plea Bargaining in United States Legal Practice, The American Journal of Comparative Law
Santobello v. New York, (1971), 404 U.S. 257, 261 retrieved from http://supreme.justia.com/us/404/257/case.html
Stuntz, William J. (Jun., 2004), Plea Bargaining and Criminal Law's Disappearing Shadow, 117, Harvard Law Review
Abadinsky, Howard. Law and Justice: An Introduction to the American Legal System. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2008. Print.
A plea bargain is compliance between a prosecutor and defendant in which the accused offender agrees to plead guilty in return for some compromise from the prosecutor. The New Jim Crow, explains how most Americans have no clue on how common it is for people to be prosecuted without proper legal representation and are sentenced to jail when innocent out of fear. Tens of thousands of poor people go to jail every year without ever talking to a lawyer that could possibly help them. Over four decades ago, the American Supreme Court ruled that low-income people who are accused of serious crimes are entitled to council, but thousands of people are processed through America’s courts annually with a low resource lawyer, or no lawyer at all. Sometimes
Convictions. Now Juries Expect the Same Thing – and That's a Big Problem.” U.S. News
In the adversarial justice system, when the offender admits to the criminal act, there is no further controversy and the case promptly proceeds to sentencing. Physical evidence and victim or witness statements may often be overlooked and not considered. The confession is considered unequivocal evidence of guilt and a conviction is ensured. Indeed, the interrogation process’ sole purpose is to obtain a confession. Zimbardo (1967) estimated that “of those criminal cases that are solved, more than 80% are solved by a confession.” (Conti, 1999) Without the confession, convictions may be reduced significantly. So why does a person falsely confess to a crime if the likelihood of a conviction is eminent? A false confession to any crime is self-destructive and counterintuitive.
The criminal trial process is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society to a great extent. For the law to be effective, the criminal trial process must reflect what is accepted by society to be a breach of moral and ethical conduct and the extent to which protections are granted to the victims, the offenders and the community. For these reasons, the criminal trial process is effectively able to achieve this in the areas of the adversary system, the system of appeals, legal aid and the jury system.
One could wonder why plea bargains are even made. One reason would be that criminal courts are becoming clogged and overcrowded. Going through the proper procedure and processes that we are granted takes time. Trials can take anywhere from days to...
Smith, C. E. (2004). Public defenders. In T. Hall, U.S. Legal System (pp. 567-572-). [Ebscohost]. Retrieved from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook
Guidelines and principles are set out as ideals, but these are easily subject to discretion, prejudice and errors at any stage (Greene and Heilbrun, 2011). The due process model aims to safeguard the defendant at each stage within the process. However, the conflicting crime control model encourages policing and guilty verdicts, whatever the repercussions (Newburn, 2007). This contest is marked throughout the CJS, “...the more we learn about the Is of the criminal process, the more we are instructed about its Ought,” (Packer, 1968, p. 150). For example, few suspects receive proficient legal defence, yet this is a contradiction to the ideological proviso. It may be interesting to research if juries have experienced and recognised any unfairness within trials. Too often the ideologies of criminal justice, due process and crime control result in miscarriages of justice (Newburn, 2007). When rigid regulatory processes result in bureaucracy, this can only cause more drain on
Knowles, Brian (2000). Is the Insanity Plea Allowing Criminals to Avoid Justice? Retrieved on 5/25/2010 from http://www.speakout.com/activism/issue_briefs/1229b-1.html
For my research paper I decided to observe at the North Justice Center in Fullerton, CA for the morning session. My goal entering there was to watch the process of a criminal trial since I felt that would be the most interesting and would allow me the opportunity to witness all the working parts of our justice system in action. While waiting for the criminal trial to open its doors and start, I managed to come across a post- arraignment court, where I was able to watch a different side of our criminal justice system. This is the side that enforces the punishment and makes sure that restitution is paid for whatever crime was committed. By far the most interesting thing I took from this experience was the differences in how the judges conducted themselves in their courtrooms and the amount of discretion that they were allowed to use. For this paper I will be going over what I observed in both the post-arraignment court and the criminal trial and analyze my findings in a sociological context.
I cannot say that I strongly agree or disagree that plea bargains are efficient because its efficiency solely depends on whether the defendant is innocent or guilty. When it comes to a person's life, one cannot trade justice with efficiency. (a) I strongly agree that the criminal processes should focus on delivering justice rather than wasting time by "horse trading." Negotiations are only beneficial to those who are guilty since they can have their charges dropped or reduced. Whereas, innocent defendants will blindly agree to the plea bargain to go home but they are forced to take responsibility for a crime they did not commit. Although plea bargains can substantially move a lot of cases through the legal system, it can also easily incite
The plea bargaining process within our criminal justice system has numerous benefits to both the offender and the system, with the victim receiving the least amount of benefit as they rarely see justice served on their own terms. Firstly, this system allows offenders of lesser crimes to get out of jail or prison sooner, often times with less time served than if they were to have been convicted after a trial. The sad truth is that most defendants cannot afford to make bail to gather witnesses and evidence, nor can they afford to invest in a skilled, interested defense attorney. This forces them to seek an alternative resolution to keep from enduring from jail the months, or even years, long judicial process that comes with a criminal trial.
...ct that in less serious crimes the defendant will plead guilty in order to receive a better deal.
Schmalleger, F. (2009), Prentice Hall, Publication. Criminal Justice Today: An introductory Text for the 21st century
Prosecutors have a one sided relationship and pressure defendants into pleading guilty regardless. Often times, prosecutors meet in secret to dictate the negotiations. What this does is it takes the power of of judges hands and compromising the liberty of the American people. Over 20% of the 2 million in prison were wrongfully convicted as they were forced to plead guilty by their prosecutor. If the individual refuses to plead guilty the prosecutor charges him or her a more harsh punishment. For example, a drug addict who refused a 10 year jail plea went to court and was charged with life in prison without parole. The prosecutor was asked if he thought this action was just and he responded with, "no comment" Thus, plea bargaining out to be