While plea bargaining is beneficial mostly for the state, it can sometimes be a curse for a defendant. For example, an innocent person may have some damning evidence against him or her even he or she is innocent. The prosecution will often pressure the defendant into believing that the jury will not find him not guilty. Therefore, the defendant will agree to the plea bargain and opt for a lesser sentence believing him or she does not have a chance of winning with a trial by jury. “Statistics show that 94% of state criminal cases and slightly more than 96% of federal criminal cases are eventually resolved through a negotiated plea.” (Schmalleger
A Plea bargain is an agreement between the prosecutor and the defendant in a criminal case where the defendant pleads guilty to a certain charge in exchange for a lesser penalty from the prosecutor. Plea bargaining brings many benefits to the prosecutor and the court system but also comes with much criticism. Normally the judge will offer a plea bargain when the defendant knowingly waives his rights and admits that their guilty. The use of plea bargaining can benefit the criminal justice system as a whole. For a defendant faces several years in jail and possibly multiple charges they can look forward to a few of their sentences being dropped and a reduction in their sentencing.
Prosecutors are responsible to make sure the guilty person is prosecuted and that innocent people are protected from unwarranted prosecution. Prosecutors decide which types of plea bargains to enter and can ask the court to dismiss the charges. Prosecutors have more discretion than any other legal person including judges. A prosecutor’s position is much more difficult than portrayed on television. On television, the prosecutor, or ADA comes in tries the case and leaves.
When a defendant accepts a plea bargain the defense team has the advantage of less work with the same pay that he or she would have received if the case had gone to trial, prosecutors get the guilty plea that he or she was working to obtain, and the court system can move through cases at a faster pace. These advantages allow the court system to stay ahead of the mounting cases presented, making the trial process faster. Prisons and other incarceration facilities can also see a reduction of criminals being incarcerated, which helps with overcrowding in these facilities.Plea bargains have advantages that affect all players in the criminal justice system but disadvantages are also present in this process. Critics of the plea bargain will suggest
According to the Legal Resource Library, “The biggest drawback to plea bargaining is for the innocent defendant who decides to plead guilty to a lesser charge in order to avoid the risk that he or she will be found guilty at trial.” Plea bargaining requires the defendant to waive three rights that he/she is normally protected by until the Fifth and Sixth Amendments: the right to a jury trial, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to confront hostile witnesses. (Cornell.edu) Some people may try to argue that plea bargaining in unconstitutional, however, this argument has been repeatedly overruled by the Supreme Court. There are a lot of controversial issues surrounding plea bargaining, and victims’ rights groups are arguing that the victim should have inputs and a voice into the bargain that is being established between the prosecutor and the defendant. Victim rights activists also feel that defendants undermine the criminal justice system in its entirety and defendants are let off too
The benefits to law enforcement are increased incentives for captured suspects, pending the prosecutions approval, and leverage for capturing more suspects or higher profile suspects to a case. The benefit to the prosecution and the judicial process are leverage similar to that of law enforcement, but the clutter of the system is one of the biggest benefits. If the court system had to prosecute every single case that comes through the system, including the guilty plea, it would be log jam that would be hard to catch up with. With plea bargaining as well, it gives the accused a chance and incentive to come clean and admit their wrongdoing so they can pay their debt to society and be on with their lives. In the end the judicial system saves money, both with the time of trials and appeals, as well as reduced charges or sentences that ultimately lead to less time the tax payer has to pay for incarceration.
Some possibilities for convicted felons for sentencing are fines, monetary sanctions, probation, community service, electronic monitoring, incarceration and the death penalty. One main criticism of restorative justice is that it fails to provide adequate protection for individual rights. Also one offender may end up being treated very differently from another who has committed a similar offence but has a more (or less) demanding victim. There are many good things about restorative justice. The offender may experience how it feels to be the victim perhaps preventing similar behavior again.
While awaiting court a defendant will be given an option to either enter a plea or go to trial. Taking a plea is an admittance of guilt and a sentence of less than the maximum is given for cooperation. If a defendant goes to trial, the punishment can be the maximum allowed by law. Once sentenced by the state the defendant will go through rehabilitation process. In the event of Xander while in custody, he can obtain his GED Even though he has experienced minor setbacks with purse snatching and with the gang affiliation.
It also is in some ways fairer to witnesses and prospective jurors. Imagine if in all these cases, the victim and witnesses had to come to court to testify. And in all these cases, people had to leave their jobs in order to serve on juries. That would be very onerous for the public. So from the stat’s point of view, if you have someone, especially someone who’s clearly guilty, and you could get them to plead guilty by offering them an inducement, it’s in everybody’s interest to do that.
Unfortunately, our society has resorted to the use of plea bargains due to the expenses of a jury trial. Pros and Cons of Mandatory Minimum Sentencing To every situation or argument there is a list of pros and cons. The following are a few of the arguments for and against mandatory minimum sentencing. Pros: (1) Keep judges from giving useless sentences, such as probation for child molesters, (2) The potential cost of committing crimes is clearly laid out, which may actually deter someone who is aware of those minimums, (3) They can also help reduce the case load at courts through plea bargains. Cons: (1) Disproportionately affect minorities, (2) Increase prison population, (3) eliminates judicial discretion so the punishment does not always fit the crime.