Plea Bargaining Overview

Plea Bargaining

• Definition: A negotiation between the defendant and prosecutor where the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser charge or gets a lighter sentence in exchange for a guilty plea.

Historical Context

• Pre-20th Century: Trials were the standard; plea bargaining was rare.
• 19th Century Increases:
  • Professionalism: Growth in legal professionalism pressured courts to resolve cases efficiently.
  • Case Pressure: Overwhelmed court systems pushed for quicker resolutions to manage burgeoning caseloads.
  • Politics: Political influences intertwined with judicial processes encouraged plea deals.

Types of Plea Bargains

• Charge Bargaining: Negotiating the charges to a lesser degree.
• Count Bargaining: Agreeing to plead to fewer counts than originally charged.
• Sentence Bargaining: The defense negotiates for a more lenient sentence.

Requirements for Acceptance of Plea Bargains by Judges

• Knowing Waiver: Defendant must be aware of their rights and the consequences.
• Voluntary Waiver: The waiver must be made freely without coercion.
• Factual Basis: Adequate evidence supporting the charges must exist.

Support and Benefits of Plea Bargaining

• Prosecutors: Expedites workload; allows focus on serious cases.
• Defense Attorneys: Better than proceeding to a potentially negative trial; helps maintain working relationships.
• Defendants: Typically receive lighter sentences than if convicted at trial.
• Judges: Reduces the number of trials they must manage.

Pros of Plea Bargaining

• Efficiency: Quickly resolves a significant number of cases.
• Economic Advantage: Reduces legal costs associated with lengthy trials.
• Conviction Rates: Prosecutors can secure convictions without the risks of trial.
• Victim Impact: Victims may avoid the stress of testifying during trials.

Cons of Plea Bargaining

• Lack of Supervision: Possibility of overlooking due process.
• Deterrence: Undermines respect for the law due to leniency.
• Secrecy: Processes may lack transparency.
• Pressure on Innocents: Wrongfully accused may feel compelled to plead.
• Low Satisfaction for Victims: Plea deals may not fulfill victims' sense of justice.
• Convenience vs. Justice: Highlights a potential prioritization of efficiency over fairness.

Legal Perspectives on Plea Bargaining

• Justice Hugo Black: Stated that defendants should not be pressured due to the state’s negligence.
• Concerns: Minor offenses may be misclassified, leading to broader disregard for justice principles.

Key Cases

• Bordenkircher v. Hayes (1978): Established precedent that the accused may accept or reject plea offers freely.
• Missouri v Frye (2012): Related to the right to effective counsel in plea negotiations.

Court Views on Plea Bargaining

• 1973 NAC Recommendations: Suggested abolishing plea bargaining due to concerns about leniency.
• U.S. Supreme Court Support: Recognized it as essential to managing court systems.
• ABA Report (2023): Noted trials are increasingly rare, with some jurisdictions experiencing no trials for years.

Experiences with Plea Bargaining Abolition

• Alaska (1975): Reported success with an increase in jury trials and a reported decrease in case backlogs.
• Various Jurisdictions: Some regions (e.g., New Orleans, Ventura County) have noted positive outcomes from banning plea bargaining.

Critiques of Plea Bargaining

• Robert Bidinotto: Argued that ending plea bargaining would prompt law enforcement and judicial systems to improve their processes and accountability.
• Sentencing Recommendations: Articles advocate for modest sentencing concessions in exchange for guilty pleas, maintaining justice without unnecessary leniency.