Define plea bargaining
According to Heumann (1981), Plea bargaining can be defined as an offer by the prosecutor to the accused so that he can plead guilty. This effectively reduces the amount of time that would have been used to go on trial. Consequently this reduces the amount of workload that the court system has thereby increasing efficiency. There are two types of plea bargaining-charge bargain and sentence bargain.
Plea bargaining can be seen as a contract between the accused and the prosecutor where the accused agrees to the terms of the contract. Should he fail to comply with the terms the prosecutor has a right to withdraw the opportunity. Some of the terms that may be explicit from the agreement could be: testifying against another suspect, pleading to another pre-agreed charge, and helping in the investigation of another crime.
Nevertheless, if the prosecutor fails to abide by his agreement with the accused and files for charges that he has previously agreed to set aside, the accused may seek a court order to compel the prosecutor to follow their previous agreement.
Distinguish between charge bargaining and sentence bargaining
A charge bargain occurs in situation where a prosecutor offers the accused an opportunity to plead to a lesser charge or in situation where the accused has a number of charges to plead guilty to some of them. For instance if the accused is accused of a crime such as murder the prosecutor can allow him to plead to a lesser charge of manslaughter. Additionally, if the accused faces charges about drunken driving without proper licensing he could plead guilty to drunken driving or driving without proper authorization.
On the other hand, sentence bargaining occurs in situations where the accused is informed well in advance the sentence that will follow the trial for his charge. This allows him to plead guilty to the said crime without the fear of being handed a much severe sentence. The prosecutor can use this option if he feels that the trial is likely to receive wide coverage from the media and thereby reduce the backlash that could result should he allow the accused to plead to a lesser charge.
However sentence bargain occurs in situations where the trial judge has approved it. Nonetheless, a lot of jurisdictions prohibits sentence bargain (Heumann 1981).
Compare and contrast the advantages and disadvantages of plea bargaining
Davies, Croall & Tyrer (1995) argues that some of the advantages which could accrue from a plea bargain include the fact that the accused has an opportunity to plead to a lesser crime. However, this benefit could only accrue to a person who committed that crime. Nonetheless, if the accused never committed the crime for which he is accused, he could feel as though he was being unjustly accused and he could appeal against the said charge.
The defense lawyer benefits by reducing the trial expenses that could result from a situation where a plea bargain was not offered. In addition, he is accorded an opportunity for reducing the sentence for his client. However, with the plea bargain, he is denied an opportunity to prove the innocence for the accused. Plea bargain also enables the justice system to reduce the workload thereby facilitating speedy dispensation of justice.
However, plea bargaining robs the prosecutor the opportunity to procure a strong conviction for the case for which the plea bargain has been entered. This goes against their objective of obtaining convictions for the cases that they are assigned to.
Plea bargaining can help to reduce the amount of time spent on a trial hence helping the court to dispense with a lot of cases. However, it can be argued that since the purpose of the justice system is to dispense justice impartially, plea bargain negates this primary role since it allows governing the delivery of justice based on expediency at the expense of available evidence which should guide the trial.
A plea bargain also gives the accused an opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge which effectively helps him to avoid a trial. However, this can be seen as a ‘punishment’ to the accused by denying him the opportunity to a fair trial. This is because every suspect has a right to a fair trial to determine his innocence or culpability in the said crime.
In addition, plea bargain invariably results to reduced charges and subsequent reduction in the sentences to the accused. However, it must be noted that the judge does not have to follow the plea bargain and may decide to override it should the situation demand it due to the gravity of the charges.
Describe how plea bargaining reflects or thwarts the crime control and due process models of criminal justice
Neubauer & Fradella (2010) argues that the duty of the judge is to ensure that cases go up to their logical conclusion while ensuring that the rights of the accused are observed during the trial. However, plea bargaining has the effect of shifting the responsibility of the judge to determine the veracity of the prosecutors evidence. This facilitates an opportunity for the prosecutor to trample upon the rights of the defendants thereby compromising on the quality of the justice dispensed by the justice system.
It must be remembered that at the heart of the crime model is the assertion that repression of crime is by far the most important function of the justice system. However, the nature of the plea bargain is such that conviction gains a higher premium than repression of crime since it facilitates a softer landing for the criminals.
In addition, the due process models advocate for repression of crime while at the same time recognizing that the prosecution could also be wrong (Neubauer & Fradella 2010).
This model is negatively affected by the plea bargain since the prosecutor seems to hold the key to singlehandedly convict the accused hence negating the principle of this model. In addition, the possibility of a plea bargain does not give the criminal a sufficient deterrent measure since they are aware that they can be let off on a lesser charge which is not commensurate with the crime which they could have committed. This can negatively affect government’s effort to reduce the crime level.
Plea bargain gives the impression that the justice system is not committed to giving a just punishment to the accused based on the gravity of the offence. It is as if the prosecutors are bent on procuring convictions at the expense of delivery of justice to the victims of the alleged crimes who may be yearning for it.
Reference list
Davies, M., Croall, H., & Tyrer, J. (1995). Criminal Justice. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Heumann, M. (1981). Plea Bargaining: The Experiences of Prosecutors, Judges, and Defense Attorneys. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago.
Neubauer, D., & Fradella, H. (2010). America’s Courts and the Criminal Justice System. South Melbourne, Australia: Cengage learning.