NCJ Number
59929
Journal
Law and Society Review Volume: 13 Issue: 2 Dated: SPECIAL ISSUE (WINTER 1979) Pages: 567-572
Date Published
1979
Length
6 pages
Annotation
THIS CRITIQUE OF LITERATURE ON PLEA BARGAINING NOTES THE SHIFT AWAY FROM A CRITICAL STANCE AGAINST THE PRACTICE TO A MORE FAVORABLE STANCE IN SUPPORT OF IT.
Abstract
MUCH OF THE WORK DONE BY ACADEMICS ON PLEA BARGAINING FROM 1965 TO 1975 ARGUE THAT IT WAS A RELATIVELY RECENT, SUB ROSA, UNDESIRABLE FEATURE OF THE DISPOSITIONAL PROCESS IN CRIMINAL COURTS. THE DEFENDERS OF THE SYSTEM DURING THIS PERIOD TENDED TO BE LAWYERS OR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND NOT ACADEMICS. ACADEMIC RESEARCH SINCE 1975 HAS FOUND MUCH THAT IS COMMENDABLE IN PRACTICE. IN FACT, CURRENT RESEARCH INDICATES THAT THE PRACTICE MAY BE WIDESPREAD, HAS BEEN PRACTICED BY COURTS FOR A LONG TIME, AND VARIES GREATLY FROM SITUATION TO SITUATION. DENUNCIATION OF PLEA BARGAINING HAS BECOME LESS USEFUL IN VIEW OF THE DIFFICULTY OF ELIMINATING THE PROCESS. IN ADDITION, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT HAS ENDORSED THE PRACTICE. HOWEVER, THE ARGUMENT THAT PLEA BARGAINING SHOULD BE ELIMINATED HAS GENERATED THE NEED FOR FURTHER RESEARCH INTO THE OPERATIONS OF THE TRIAL SYSTEM TO DECIDE WHETHER TRIALS SHOULD BE USED AS THE PREFERRED METHOD OF DETERMINING GUILT OR INNOCENCE AND SETTING SENTENCES. FINALLY, MORE STUDY NEEDS TO BE FOCUSED ON THE APPROPRIATENESS OF PLEA BARGAINING IN COURT CASES WHERE THERE IS DOUBT ABOUT THE DEFENDANT'S GUILT OR THE SEVERITY OF PUNISHMENT REQUIRED. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (KCP)