NCJ Number
10620
Journal
Trial Volume: 9 Issue: 3 Dated: (MAY/JUNE 1973) Pages: 23-26
Date Published
1973
Length
4 pages
Annotation
PROBLEMS RESULTING FROM SENTENCING PROMISES BY TRIAL JUDGES DURING PLEA NEGOTIATIONS ARE ANALYZED, AND SEVERAL REMEDIES ARE SUGGESTED TO PROTECT THE DEFENDANT'S RIGHTS.
Abstract
THE SUPREME COURT HAS MANDATED THAT TO PRESERVE THE DEFENDANT'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS TRIAL RECORDS MUST SHOW THAT GUILTY PLEAS WERE ENTERED VOLUNTARILY, INTELLIGENTLY, AND UNDERSTANDINGLY. DIFFICULTIES IN MEETING THE VOLUNTARINESS STANDARD ARE ENCOUNTERED WHEN JUDGES TENDER SENTENCING PROMISES DURING PLEA BARGAINING. THE COERCIVENESS INHERENT IN SUCH SITUATIONS HAS LED TO TWO LINES OF APPELLATE DECISIONS LIMITING TRIAL JUDGE DISCRETION IN THIS AREA, THOSE WHICH BAR JUDICIAL PARTICIPATION IN PLEA NEGOTIATIONS COMPLETELY, AND THOSE WHICH HOLD JUDICIAL PROMISES TO ONLY BE ONE FACTOR IN DETERMINING THE VOLUNTARINESS OF A PLEA. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE BEST SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM IS TO BAR THE TRIAL JUDGE FROM PLEA NEGOTIATIONS AND TO BIND HIM TO IMPOSE A SENTENCE NO GREATER THAN THAT RECOMMENDED BY THE PROSECUTOR. IF THE PROSECUTION RECOMMENDATION IS DENIED, THE DEFENDANT SHOULD BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO WITHDRAW HIS PLEA.