The Pros And Cons Of Plea Bargaining

2.) According to Judge Joseph Colquitt (2001: 706), “[t]o date, those who would abolish plea bargaining have been largely unsuccessful. In fact, some would argue that the battle against plea bargaining has been lost.” If you agree that the battle against plea bargaining has been lost, what steps would you take to ensure the fairness and constitutionality of plea bargaining practices in light of its inevitability, and if you disagree, then what steps would you take either to limit or eliminate plea bargaining?

Introduction

Plea bargaining has emerged very early in history, and it has played an important role in the contemporary criminal justice system. Indeed, plea bargaining is a “necessary evil” because it brings advantage to all sides including the prosecutor, defendant and the court judges. Its necessity does not constitute its constitutionality, however, and plea bargaining should be limited in certain cases because it can be problematic in various aspects. In light of its inevitability, a categorization system can be employed to limit the use of plea bargaining and ensure its fair use, and that there should be specific guidelines of plea bargaining in each category of crime. In this paper, the definition and necessity of plea bargaining as well as its potential problems are discussed first. Then the paper would introduce the categorization system that originated from a comparative perspective. The specifics of the system would be discussed, and finally, its limitations and suggested further research or development.

The Nature of Plea Bargaining

Plea bargaining describes a deal between the prosecutor and the defense attorney, who represents the defendant, that they negotiate a deal for either a lesser conviction or a lesser se...

... middle of paper ...

...instead of 25 years if they pleaded guilty. (Wan 37) In addition, money can become a reason for defense attorney to encourage pleading guilty. Private defense attorney may want to spend more effort in cases where they have more possibility of winning and thus getting more money, and public defenders find pleading guilty an effective way to move through cases quicker. (Mohr 6) For prosecutors, “guilty pleas avoided ‘onerous and protracted’ trials whose outcomes – ‘losing’ or ‘having to oppose an appeal to the higher courts’ – were both undesirable.” (Smith 134) Finally for judges, plea bargain reduces their caseload, and elevates their reputation indirectly because accepting a plea bargaining also includes waiver of appeal to higher courts. (Mohr 6)

Criticism of plea bargaining mainly stems from two aspects. First, on the defendant’s aspect, a plea bargain can coerce