NCJ Number
10626
Journal
Trial Volume: 9 Issue: 3 Dated: (MAY/JUNE 1973) Pages: 11-15
Date Published
1973
Length
5 pages
Annotation
IN VIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING PLEA BRGAINING, A CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROFESSOR EXPLAINS PLEA BARGAINING PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES, AS WELL THE MOTIVES OF THE DEFENDANT AND THE STATE FOR ENGAGING IN PLEA NEGOTIATION.
Abstract
PLEA BARGAINING IS A PREARRANGED 'DEAL' BETWEEN THE PROSECUTION AND THE DEFENSE IN WHICH CHARGES ARE DROPPED OR WHERE SPECIFIC SENTENCE PROMISES ARE MADE IN EXCHANGE FOR THE DEFENDANT'S WILLINGNESS TO PLEAD GUILTY. ALTHOUGH PLEA NEGOTIATIONS ARE COMMON IN ALL JURISDICTIONS IN THE COUNTRY, LEGAL SCHOLARS AND SOCIAL SCIENTISTS BECAME INTERESTED IN THE SUBJECT ONLY DURING THE 1960'S WHEN THE AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION STUDIED PLEA BARGAINING PRACTICES. ALTHOUGH VARIATIONS EXIST IN TYPES OF PLEA AGREEMENTS AND PROCEDURES, A TYPICAL BARGAINING SESSION CAN BE DESCRIBED. NUMEROUS CONSIDERATIONS CAN ARISE IN PLEA NEGOTIATION DEPENDING ON THE PARTICULAR DEFENDANT, THE CRIME OR CRIMES CHARGED, AND THE SENTENCING STRUCTURE AND PRACTICES OF THE JURISDICTION. GENERALLY, GUILTY DEFENDANTS FAVOR PLEA BARGAINING BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MINIMIZE BOTH THE SENTENCE AND THE LABEL ATTACHED TO IT AND ALSO HOPE TO AVOID PUBLICITY. THE STATE FINDS THE BARGAINED PLEA TO BE MORE EFFICIENT, CHEAPER, AND MORE CERTAIN THAN CONTESTED CASE. THE STATE MAY HOPE TO AVOID CHALLENGES TO THE AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE AND THE WAYS IT WAS OBTAINED, THEREBY AVOIDING CONTROVERSIAL QUESTIONS OF POLICE PRACTICES, PROSECUTORIAL TRIAL SKILLS, AND THE ADEQUACY OF LEGISLATIVE SENTENCING PROVISIONS. OTHER STATE CONSIDERATIONS UNDERLYING PLEA NEGOTIATION THAT ARE LESS SELF-SEEKING ARE NOTED. ALTHOUGH THE ETHICS OF PLEA NEGOTIATION ARE CONTINUALLY DEBATED, RECENT POSITIONS BY LEGAL ORGANIZATIONS AND APPELLATE JUDGES HAVE BEEN IN FAVOR OF PLEA BARGAINING AS A NECESSARY AND DESIRABLE PART OF AMERICAN COURT PRACTICE. UNRESOLVED ISSUES ABOUT PLEA BARGAINING INCLUDE (1) THE RANGE OF PLEA BARGAINING, (2) EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO BARGAIN, (3) 'QUICK' JUSTICE, (4) THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO KNOW, AND (5) THE CORRUPTION OF IDEOLOGY. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (WJR)