Plea bargaining is admitting guilt in exchange for the charges being dismissed or having their severity lessened. Judges see plea bargaining as favorable in the American legal system. It makes case prosecution convenient and adaptable. In exchange for more compassionate punishments than they would have received had they chosen to prosecute their charges and were found guilty, defendants give up their rights. The most considerable criticism for plea bargaining is forcing defendants to give up their rights under the Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
The idea of plea bargaining is perceived as coercive since prosecutors may force defendants to give up their rights out of fear that they will face harsher penalties if they do not plead guilty. It is assumed that if one is factually innocent, one will not enter a guilty plea. This is not entirely true, which is why plea bargaining has been labeled modern-day torture. Due to the threat of receiving a death sentence, defendants may be forced to make a guilty plea even if they are innocent. This may happen due to how the case is set up when the prosecutor offers options that cannot be turned down. However, a person can voluntarily submit a guilty plea with no coercion when faced with the death penalty.
As long as a person can voluntarily weigh their options and make an informed decision, entering a guilty plea is not forced. One study discovered that the possibility of the death penalty induces many people to confess to the accusations they were initially charged with (Subramanian et al., 2020). Charge bargains must be distinguished from sentence bargains in guilty pleas. While the death penalty promotes sentence bargains, it does not encourage charge bargains. It is sufficient to remark that, despite many offenders entering guilty pleas to avoid receiving harsher sentences, very few do so without compulsion. This can happen when the defendant is genuinely guilty to avoid trial, eventually leading them to the death sentence.
The idea of plea bargaining is allowed constitutionally but has been subject to several supreme court interpretations. Pleas must be entered knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily, according to Brady V. United States. Brady mandates that rule 11 of the federal rules of criminal procedure apply to the admission of a plea. Judges must participate in the plea discussion. The defendant must be informed of the charges’ nature by the judge. The prosecutor tells the accuser of the evidence supporting the charges. The prosecutor must make sure the plea is being made voluntarily. In Bordenkircher v. Hayes (1978), the Supreme Court approved coercion. It stated that guilty pleas obtained under duress, such as death penalty threats, may be voluntary and constitutionally free of coercion and that the choice to enter a plea is not coerced if the defendant can make a free and informed decision among available options. This was built on the assumption that innocent people may not plea guilt, which is not the case.
Given the expense of a trial, the death penalty imposes a heavy strain on the legal system; hence the incentives to plea bargain might be magnified. According to the Supreme Court, people may only enter a guilty plea if they know the repercussions and do it voluntarily (Dervan, 2019). Before acceptance, pleas are subject to withdrawal at any time. It may also be revoked following acceptance but before sentencing, if deemed fair and just.
References
Dervan, L. E. (2019). Bargained Justice: The History and Psychology of Plea Bargaining and the Trial Penalty. Papers. Web.
Subramanian, R., Digard, L., Ii, M., & Sorage, S. (2020). In the Shadows: A Review of the Research on Plea Bargaining. Web.