Plea Bargain Advantages

Plea Bargain Advantages
When most people think of criminal sentencing they think of a grand wooden courtroom with a full
jury and a proud judge in black presiding over it all, but that is far from the usual for those that are
accused of federal crimes. The reality of what happens after you are accused of a crime is much
different, as much of the bulk of those accused of a crime end up plea bargaining for a variety of
reasons, and very few people actually end up going to trial. An in depth look is necessary to really
understand the complicated truth of the relationship the plea bargain has with our justice system and
our citizens. To understand the plea bargain it takes looking into what originally it was made for,
what it represents now, and the effect it has on our ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"In 2013, while 8 percent of all federal crime charges were dismissed... more than 97 percent of the
remainder were resolved through plea bargains, and fewer than 3 percent went to trial."3 It was the
goal at our country's founding that almost all citizens accused of a crime have a fair and impartial
jury trial to decide the innocence or guilt of the accused, and we know where and why that changed
and the effect it has on the system and government but what about the citizens and society? What
about the people the very system is meant to protect and serve? Despite the advantages plea
bargaining gives to the defendant it's very essence is assuming that the defendant is guilty, so what if
they're not? It's not all that uncommon to get the wrong guy when searching for a suspect especially
when racial and class profiling comes into the mix. So understanding the 8% being thrown out for
this reason there's still a lot of room for innocents still within the system, and going by the statistics
it seems very likely that there are innocents being forced, coerced, or outright bullied into plea
bargaining
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Plea Bargaining Pros And Cons
Plea bargaining is any agreement is an agreement between the prosecutor and defendant agrees to
plead guilty to a particular charge in exchange for a concession from the prosecutor. There are many
benefits to the defendant and justice system which can vary to relieving the defendant of a major
conviction and benefit them based on the final decision, while also avoiding the trial set by the
courts. The justice system benefits from the plea bargain because the prosecutor is able to convict
the defendant of committing the the crime towards society and win the case without having to
proceed to trial. On the other hand plea bargaining is controversial since it skips through the entire
investigative process and is considered to be an easy way out of trial since the conviction can
become less than what is actually supposed to be the actual time for the commited crime. For
example a murder can convicted a person up to life in prison, and a plea bargain can reduce the time
in prison for the defendant by 10 years, which is unfair since now the defendant gets to spend less
time in prison for such a horrific crime. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The plea bargaining systems can be crooked since the amount of jail time can easily be reduced in
order to satisfy the state in winning the case, but does that actually mean that justice was served for
the public. The public's perception of plea bargaining is that it causes a unfair decision to
automatically be able to sway the criminal justice system to easily reduce the amount of time or to
just drop the trial and not push for the maximum prison sentence available based on the

Why Plea Bargains Should Be Taken To Trial
When it comes to trials there is a great deal of uncertainty. There is no way to predict what a jury or
judge will decide. A case that a lawyer thought would go one way could completely turn and do the
opposite. This leads to the question of whether a case should be taken to trial or not. It is because of
this that plea bargaining is often put to use. Plea bargaining is beneficial to the prosecutor as well as
the defense attorney and the defendant. Plea bargains are based upon the mutual interest of all
parties involved and they can occur for a variety of reasons. One reason a plea bargain may occur is
because a prosecutors evidence is not as strong as they would like. Prosecutors want their cases to
be as strong as possible so that they can expect a win. If they are unsure of what the outcome may
be, they prefer to find a way to avoid going to trial. Plea bargains offer prosecutors a speedy
conviction without committing to the necessities of a trial. However, this does not only help the
prosecutor. The accused may find reduced charges, reduced defense costs, and sometimes even a
shorter sentence than originally planned. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Perhaps the prosecutor knows that he will win the case. If he/she has enough evidence to convict the
defendant it may be that the defense attorney suggests that a plea bargain would be best for his/her
client. Sometimes plea bargains are offered when the defendant releases information about other
crimes they are aware of. In return, they get the possibility of reduced charges that I mentioned
earlier. Once again, the benefits of plea bargains are mutual to everyone involved. While there may
be many different reasons as to why a plea bargain may occur, these are just a few

Legal approach to "A Few Good Men"
A Few Good Men
The movie, "A Few Good Men," is a story about a pair of U.S. Marines that are charged with
murder. They feel that their innocence prevails because their acts were committed as direct orders
from their superiors, and these types of orders are not disobeyed. As the story unravels, there are
many legal issues that we have covered in our class, BU11, The Legal Environment of Business. In
this paper, I plan to go over the main legal elements which occur throughout the film.
Starting off with the facts of the movie, case that is being presented is a criminal one. Two Marines,
PFC. Louden Downey and Lance Cpl. Harold W. Dawson, are charged with murder, conspiracy to
commit murder, and conduct unbecoming a Marine. The reason I ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
At this point, Lt. Kaffee wishes to find other representation for his clients because he holds the right
to withdraw from the case if his clients refuse to cooperate. After a night of thinking it over, he
decides to represent them and enters a plea for not guilty at their arraignment. That brings us into the
trial, which is called a general court marshal.
The main argument the defense is planning to use is that the Marines standing trial were executing
an order in which they didn't think would result in harm. In his opening statement to the jury of nine,
Capt. Ross drives the facts of the case into the jury. This would seem normal because for the
prosecution, this case is based heavily on facts. The facts are that one Marine is dead, and two other
are standing trial for his death. The defense's rebuttal points out that the actions carried out by the
Marines were orders by their commanding officer.
The prosecution, representing the U.S. Government, calls the first witness. A N.I.S. (Naval
Investigative Service) officer states that he received a letter from the victim, Private First Class
William T Santiago, requesting a transfer off the base. In exchange, the victim would provide
evidence of an illegal shooting over the fence line. The offender of the fence line shooting was
Lance Cpl. Dawson. The prosecution was trying to show motive by their line of questioning. The
defense makes the point

The Plea Bargain System And Fairness, Morality, And Process
The entire plea bargain system has glaring issues of fairness, morality, and process. It needs an
overhaul. Plea bargains are a way to "get rid" of some cases due to the sheer number of cases in the
judicial system. There are not enough resources for most cases to reach trial. Innocent defendants
are often pressured and coerced into accepting plea bargains. Prosecutors create uncertainty among
defendants by aggressively handling each individual each often making threats that they can not
actually back up. While this is fairly effective, it is not fair to the defendants. Additionally, it more
time is spent on strategy and games then on discovering the truth. However, no case should receive
biased treatment. Prosecutors sometimes blatantly ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
"The advantages, gamesmanship, and leverage that account for a plea bargain override an honest
and fair assessment of truth" (Strutin, 2013). This statement is painfully accurate. Yale Law Journal
(1972) states that "the elimination of the maximum number of trials" is the purpose of the plea
bargain. Plea bargains are a largely a result of a need for speed and efficiency in the courts.
"However, efficiency comes at a significant cost: innocent defendants are induced to plead guilty"
(Gilchrist, 2011). In many, cases plea bargains are too efficient. "These wrongful convictions not
only harm the innocent persons who plead guilty; they undermine the reliability of all convictions"
(Gilchrist, 2011). This brings controversy over all plea bargains .Speed and efficiency should never
be placed over reaching the correct verdict. All that is needed for a plea bargain is admission from
the defendant; however, a defendant cannot convict themselves with a testimony in trial. This
practice illustrates the controversy of plea bargains as compared to more reliable trials. Plea bargains
allow for defendants to be coerced into giving false admissions of guilt. Additionally, defendants are
confused by their emotions during the plea bargain process. When faced with the difficult decision
of a plea bargain, innocent defendants are often hurt by their emotions, which should not be the
case. Gilchrist (2011) writes, "Plea bargaining generates

Against Plea Bargains
Let's pretend that you have been accused of a serious crime. You allegedly match the suspect
description and have been picked up by your local police department. Your family and neighbors all
watching you as you are being hauled off to your local jail. You are being detained in a cell awaiting
to speak with someone that can help you. A public defender has been assigned to assist you because
you only earn minimum wage and cannot afford to hire your own private counsel. The public
defender informs you that the prosecutor has offered a plea bargain; plea guilty and get only 2 years
in jail or go to trial and possibly face 15+ years if found guilty. You know you are innocent, but the
thought of being incarcerated for that much time begins that weigh in on you. Your public defender,
who is supposed to be there to help you, recommends you take the plea. "It'll only be two years", he
says "more than likely less with good behavior". You don't even know what evidence the prosecutor
has against you, if any. You are given a week to accept or reject the offer, while being detained in a
cell because you couldn't make your monetary ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Innocent people are being accused of crimes and confronted with these plea bargains that only offer
two very difficult choices, guilty or innocent. People are then intimidated by the prosecutor's list of
multiple charges and lengthy sentences which creates fear in many individuals, especially those who
are ignorant of the law. This fear coerces defendants to plead guilty because they want to get out as
quickly as possible and put this behind them. It is this coercion that creates the controversy in plea
bargains. These deals were initially meant to speed up the court process while cutting offenders
some slack. But they have now turned into a quick method for the prosecutor to secure convictions
resulting in the spread of

Arguments Against Plea Bargain
Plea bargains have been a fundamental part of the United States justice system since the late 1800's
history.com. From the time the plea bargain was implemented, its constitutionality has been
questioned. Although the arguments against plea bargains are justified, plea bargains are the best
option for the time being. Removing plea bargains would resolve various issues in the United State's
modern justice system, but the complications resulting from such a change would be simply
overwhelming. Throughout the years, the plea bargain has been repeatedly criticized. Not only has
the plea bargain been criticized, but some criticisms go to the extent of deeming it unconstitutional.
The plea bargain is sometimes regarded as unconstitutional for supposedly forcing accused citizens
to admit guilt. This statement is without question not true. The citizen is allowed to deny the plea
bargain unconditionally. This means every citizen of the United States is allowed a trial as it is
written in the constitution and is never forced to admit guilt. Although residents of the United States
are never forced to admit guilt, they can often be pressured into making that decision. There are
many reasons why this situation can occur, but it usually ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
Citizens can always be bailed out of jail during the process, but if they cannot afford the bail, this is
a major problem. The reasons plea bargains are not accountable for this problem is because this
situation would still occur without plea bargains. Along with the last issue, plea bargains actually
help this dilemma. This is again because plea bargains reduce the number of court cases. Without
plea bargains, the number of people waiting in jail for a trial would increase drastically. On top of
this, plea bargains provide an alternative option if the person in question does not want to wait for
their trial for extended periods of

A Summary Of Legal Issues In Law
The attorney was blindsided. We had prepared several motions, and requested a probable cause
hearing. The client had been lying since walking into the office. This only served to make it harder
for the attorney to defend the client. The client wasted time, and resources. This did not really make
sense to me. As Sherman stated "most prospective clients know that whatever they tell us is
privileged information and cannot be used against them...occasionally I have to remind them that it
is unethical for me to tell on them to the authorities" (Sherman, 2008, pp. 35). Information is
privileged. The more information that the attorney knows, helps to strengthen the case. In most
cases that is. Sherman in his book details a case that he had a ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
One client called to tell us that they would be taking the minor children out of the state, to hide them
from the other parent. This is a direct violation of the order. They are essentially telling the attorney
that they are kidnapping the children. This places the attorney in an questionably ethical situation.
Can she call the police to report this, or is it covered under attorney–client privilege? The attorney
strongly advised that her client not do what she said she was going to. Another client tried to conceal
their finances. Most divorce cases also have to being with filing a Domestic Relations Financial
Affidavit. This document shows each parties income, account balances, debt, and assets. The client
provided statements that showed the balance of their retirement accounts. Somehow, two
transactions occurred after the filing. Two separate fifty thousand dollar withdrawals had been made
against the account. The client tried to hide one hundred thousand dollars from the divorce
settlement. This begs the question, did opposing council know of these transactions? One source
identified that "in terms of the Fairness Principle, the ethical issue attorneys most often face in
negotiation practice is probably the issue of truthfulness and misrepresentation" (Saito, 2017, pp.
333). This sources states that there is not a ethical question. If the attorney knew that their client
removed the funds, it is illegal. The source states

Character Analysis: Plea Bargain
Imagine yourself as a teenager rotting away in a jail cell your whole life. More importantly, imagine
that the reason your are there is because your were trying to protect yourself. Erik Jensen, 17, and
Nathan Ybanez, 15, were sentenced to prison for life without parole. Nathan struck his mother with
fireplace tongs; then he, Erik, and their friend, Brett Benson, destroyed the evidence. Brett took a
plea bargain. Some say they deserve life because of their crime, but they were not in the right place
of mind. Therefore, justice was not served in either case. To start, there was not a fair trial offered.
Ybanez and his father had a very poor relationship, and his father hired his lawyer. Erik Jensen was
charged with more than he deserved due

Plea Bargain Research Paper
Plea Bargain Essay It has been understood that many successful criminal prosecutions in the United
States end not with jury trial, rather yet plea bargain. Plea bargains are agreements between
prosecutor and defendant, where the defendant agrees to plead guilty in order to receive a lesser
offence or sentence. "The mode of plea–bargaining is most closely associated with high volume,
low–stakes cases like misdemeanors and low grade felonies, as well as cases in which the prosecutor
and defense lawyer have a good relationship and a long history of past dealings,"(O'Hear,2008).
Throughout the following report I will be creating a scenario as a prosecutor proposing a plea offer
alongside with a role of defense counsel and preparing a counteroffer

Stephanie Gillespie
Period 3 Goldsmith
April 18th, 2015
Plea Bargaining
On February 7th, 1881 a new term was coined, "plea bargain". Albert McKenzie pleaded guilty to a
misdemeanor charge of embezzlement instead of the felony charge he originally faced for stealing
money from a sewing company. Plea bargains are also known as plea agreements, plea deals or
"copping a plea". This is any agreement in a criminal case, within a criminal court, where the
prosecutor and defendant agree to make a deal. The defendant agrees to plead guilty to a particular
charge in return for some concession from the prosecutor. There are two types of plea bargains. One
type of plea deal involves the defendant pleading guilty to a less serious charge, or to one of ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Instead of being sentenced to the death, he accepted a sentence of "life in prison without the
possibility of parole plus 1,000 years".
Because plea bargains are so controversial, it is no surprise that there are pros and cons of using
them. Some of the pros include: allowing both parties to avoid a lengthy criminal trial, or allowing
criminal defendants to avoid the risk of conviction at trial on a more serious charge. However, on
the contrary, plea bargains often make the defendant feel forced to plead guilty to a lesser charge in
order to avoid the risk that he or she may be found guilty at trial. Often times plea bargains lead to
poorly operated police investigations and attorneys may not take the proper efforts and time to
prepare their cases.
Many people believe that plea bargains should be abolished because they see them as
unconstitutional since plea deals take away a defendant's constitutional right to a trial by jury.
Accepting a plea bargain waives a defendant's right to three of their basic rights protected by the
constitution–the fifth amendment's right against self–incrimination, the sixth amendment's right to a
trial by jury, and the right to confront hostile witnesses. The latter, has been made even more
accessible by the 14th amendment which expands the sixth amendment not only to state courts, but
also to federal

Plea Bargain History
The use of plea bargaining has been prevalent in the modern Justice system throughout generations.
It was not until the early twentieth century that its use became common and admissible in courts.
During the early twenties the great experiment of prohibition came about, legally this resulted in the
over criminalization of many laws, and saw the courts swell far beyond overcapacity. Although it's
been legally used for over a hundred years, the plea bargain saw its real start begin with this massive
influx of criminals. Throughout its early history the plea bargain was seen as a tool to buy freedom,
lawyers and judges did not try and hide the price tag of a reduced scented, naturally it was used as a
tool of corruption. Even after the end of prohibition the United States government searched to over
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It's so effective because the prosecution has the unique opportunity the use a defendant's physcology
against them. Prosecutors understood the threat of a harsher sentence, made their deal almost
impossible to refuse. In the case of Brady v. United States, the threat of the death penalty was used
as a tool of coercion. The case centered around brady, a man accused of kidnapping, who pleaded
guilty after the threat of the death penalty was made, and his co defendant's testimony against him,
he later appealed his case to the Supreme Court. His argument was that a threat of death was
considered coercion, and the prosecution used it to illicit a guilty plea. The court decided against
Brady, the confession was not forced, and he understood his right to a trial and due process. From
cases like Brady v. United States, the courts saw plea bargaining as not only constitutional but
necessary. This further solidified its popular use in courts, and as a result we have the legal system
we know today. If a confession is not forced, it's deemed

Plea Bargains In Prisons
American prison food was already subpar to begin with, but with budget cuts and efforts to save
money, many prisons and companies chose to make cuts with the quality and amounts of food given
to the prisoners. The Schuylkill County Prison in Pennsylvania was sued for not feeding their
inmates enough to feed a child (Santo & Iaboni, 2015). Some prisons, and private companies,
generally go by a calorie minimum that must be provided, which sometimes allow for prisoners to
only get two meals a day, these meals can cost as low as 56 cents per meal, and supposedly these
menus are being reviewed by a nutritionist (Santo & Iaboni, 2015). One of these meal programs
provided by a prison in Maricopa County, Arizona has even chosen to cut out meat ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
A more common practice would be fines, followed by suspended sentences (Subramanian &
Shames, 2014), which is very similar to the American practice of probation, in which an offender
must still report to a supervisor and show improvement in character (Subramanian & Shames,
2014). Task penalties can also be a possible sentence, like suspended sentences, the offender is still
in the community and under a supervisor, but is also required to complete a work order, which can
be training or another community based activity which teaches the offender different behavioral or
communication skills (Subramanian & Shames, 2014). These penalties are allowing offenders to
contribute and learn from their community to help develop better social and behavioral skills which
may be new for certain

Plea Bargain Analysis
The most common thing that is done when defendants are sentenced, is that they are heard in front
of a judge to receive their punishment for their conviction. Another alternative would be a plea
bargain, a plea bargain is when a defendant pleads guilty in order to receive a lesser or their charges
could be dropped ("Lecture 6, 2016"). This analysis will go over a plea bargain for Mario whom is
being charged with possession of methamphetamine and with a DUI with a BAC of .08/.09 on the
prosecuting side, what defense counsel would like to offer, and giving the reason for justification of
the offer. Now that Mario has been charged with two counts, which are possession, driving under the
influence, and his bac was .08/.09 just barely reaching legal limits. In fact, "BrAC is used to assess
impaired driving; in the United States, for those of legal drinking age, it is illegal to drive with a
BrAC above 0.08% (Martin, & Chaney, & Cremeens–Matthews, J., & Vail–Smith, (2016). The
prosecuting side would like to offer deal, instead of taking the case to trail the prosecutors will offer
Mario 6 months to a year in county jail, following 1 to 2 years of probation upon release. Driving
under the influence is a serious problem and DUI's causes a lot of ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The prosecution has offered Mario 1 year in county jail, and 1 to 2 years on probation upon his
release. Defense counsel can than ask the courts for the prosecutor to show proof that the illegal
drugs were intended for sale. In fact, the defense is entitled to be fully informed of the waiver of
their rights (Neubauer, & Fradella, 2014). The only way Mario case will not go to trail is be him
accepting a plea bargain. Again mentioned earlier, defendant benefits are those of being allowed to
plead to a reduced charge or receiving a more lenient sentence for the charged offense or both
(Ulhman, & Walker,

Pros And Cons Of Plea Bargain
Plea Bargain – Pros and Cons
Introduction
The criminal justice system is in constant demands of a lot of logistics and resources to maintain its
functionality. Many of these come with the high price of trying accused persons. Nevertheless, there
has been a long–established common law component that affords the accused to cop out in return for
a reduce sentence. "A plea bargain is an agreement by the defendant to plead guilty to charges in
exchange for something of benefit to them." (Hayden, 2017, p. 377). Thus, a person who is alleged
to have committed a specific crime is able to plead guilty and get a lighter sentence. At face value, it
appears to be a good thing that produces a win–win situation for the criminal justice system as well
as

Plea Bargain
Brittany Rulli According to Timothy Sandefur's In Defense of Plea Bargaining article, "a plea
bargain is a contract with the state. The defense agrees to plead guilty to a lesser crime and receive a
lesser sentence, rather than go to trial on a more severe charge where he faces the possibility of a
harsher sentence." We are also told in The New York Times Article; Federal Law on Sentencing is
Unjust, Judge Rules that "about 97 percent of federal criminal convictions nationwide were the
result of plea bargains."
In a Frontline Program– The Plea we watched in class there were interviews of people involved in
three separate cases that had involved the plea bargain. In this video a man named Charles Gampero
had gotten into a ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
As I had previously stated, plea bargains are both helpful and harmful to people, depending on their
situation. In The Defense of Plea Bargaining article we learned about the Bordenkircher v. Hayes
case. In this case Paul Lewis Hayes was charged with a crime punished with a 2–10 year sentence.
The prosecutor had offered Hayes a plea bargain of 5 years if he had plead guilty and told him that if
he did not take the plea he would "indict him under the state's Habitual Criminal Act. Because he
was a repeat offender, conviction under the Act meant a lifetime sentence." Hayes had took the case
to trial and gotten a life sentence. If I had been in Hayes' situation I would have plea guilty and took
the 5 years as soon as I had heard that I could get life imprisonment because of the state's Habitual
Criminal Act. On the other hand, if I was in Patsy Kelly Jarret's situation in the Frontline Program–
The Plea I would have done the same as her and taken it to trial. If I had known I was innocent and
knew that the only evidence against me was someone saying it was me at the gas station that night I
would have believed that I could have won the case. I believe that plea bargains are very important
to the U.S. criminal justice system. Without having plea bargains our criminal justice system would
be

Plea Bargaining Advantages
Some advantages and disadvantages of plea–bargaining: As the name implies, a plea bargain
oftentimes allows a defendant to plea to a reduced charge, or have the District Attorney agree to
request a lesser sentence from the court. The advantage of this to the defendant is that it removes the
risk of receiving a higher sentence. The disadvantage is that it also eliminates the possibility of
being acquitted. A plea–bargain avoids trial. The advantage of this to the court and District Attorney
is increased capacity to handle cases (trials take time, and the plea–bargain reduces the amount of
time spent), and substantially reduced cost. An advantage to the prosecution and disadvantage to the
defendant is that entering a plea generally reduces the ability ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This model supports those actions of the police and prosecutors to the fullest extent. The analogy
used to describe what the Crime Control Model looks like is a "conveyor belt." It moves the "alleged
Criminal" through the system with the forethought that everyone is guilty until proven otherwise.
This model also limits the amount of plea–bargaining and appeals. The demand for finality is high in
the Crime Control Model.
The Due Process Model is said to resemble an "obstacle course." The values within the Due Process
model are based upon repression of crime as well as not assuming the police are not always correct
in their "fact finding." This system is far more realistic in the fact that it leaves room for error. It
does not automatically assume that the alleged criminal is guilty before the case is proven. The
finality is very low within the Due Process Model. This means that there is room for appeals. This
system does not want to risk prosecuting an innocent person; it demands the prevention and
elimination of mistakes to the extent

Plea-Bargains: Currency of the Courts An Examination of...
"Rahim Jaffer case heads for plea–bargain"; former Alberta MP Rahim Jaffer was being charged on
cocaine possession and drunk–driving charges; his case was likely to be resolved with a plea–
bargain agreement (Makin, 2010). This is but one case of many that are settled though a plea–
bargain agreement. Plea–bargaining can take the form of a sentence reduction, a withdrawal or stay
of other charges, or, a promise not proceed on other charges, in exchange for a guilty plea by an
accused. During discussion of a potential plea bargain agreement, the Crown Attorney and defence
lawyer will look at 4 distinct sections of a plea negotiation: charge discussions, sentence
discussions, procedural discussions, and agreements as to the facts of the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
For a Judge, the incentive to accept a plea bargain is to alleviate the need to schedule a trial on an
already overcrowded court docket, and in recognizing an already overcrowded prison system
"processing out" the offenders who are not likely to serve a lengthy jail time anyways ("Findlaw,"
2012). Prosecutors have similar feelings as judges regarding plea–bargaining. Plea–bargaining
lightens the prosecutor's caseload while at the same time, assures a conviction of guilty offenders
(even on a lighter sentence), particularly because of the high evidentiary burden in a criminal trial
("Enotes," 2012). Plea–bargaining has caused our judges to heavily rely on its use to keep the court
system moving, as judges are able to dispose of cases more efficiently.
The importance of the efficient and timely disposition of criminal cases is best illustrated in the case
of R. v Askov. Askov and the co–accused were charged with conspiracy to commit extortion
(blackmail). There was a 4 year delay with the trial, which at the time, the accused had spent a
considerable amount of time in jail. Askov argued under section 11 of the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms, that his right to a trial within a reasonable time had been violated. The trial judge agreed
stating that there were no exceptional circumstance to why the accused right were violated and as
such he dismissed the charge. The case was eventually appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada,

132 People In Jail Essay
When jails and prisons are built, like other buildings, they come with an occupancy limit for good
reason. This is for the well–being of everyone in the building, but also, should there be an
emergency and the building needs to be evacuated, everyone will be able to get out quickly and
safely. If a building is overcrowded, there is a chance that with there being so many extra people in
the building, that some people might get trampled, or trapped in the building. When it comes to jails,
the number of people allowed to be in them is important because that accounts for the number of
beds that are in the jail, as well as the number of resources in the jail for each person to live
seemingly comfortable. Having an extra 132 people in a jail that was originally built to only hold
332 is very excessive and cannot be comfortable for anyone in it, nor is it safe for some inmates.
Those who suffer from being mentally ill probably face the most issues with it. Being in jail is
already the wrong place for anybody with a mental illness to be, but to be there and not have any
personal space may trigger some people to act out, especially if that is not something that are used
to. Jails are also expected to do more than just house the individuals who have been sentenced there,
they are expected to provide some form of rehabilitation to the inmates, with hopes that they will not
recidivate and return to prison once they have been released. If there are an excessive amount of
extra people

Plea Bargaining Advantages
Plea bargaining is becoming progressively popular over time passes there are many prisoners that
have decided to go the route of accepting plea deals. Plea bargaining is referred to a situation where
the prosecutor and the defendant arises to an agreement whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a
case so that he or she can be given a concession or a lesser sentence. Plea bargains often occur after
a careful analysis and acknowledgment of the strengths and weaknesses of a case.
In the U.S. Criminal Justice System, a defendant may be motivated to take a plea bargain. Reason
being is because plea bargaining takes away the hesitation of a criminal trial and circumvents the
maximum sentence.
Most plea bargains offer reduced charges, which not only comes with a reduced sentence but does
not look as bad on the defendant's permanent record. Pleading guilty or no contest in exchange for a
reduction in the number of charges or the seriousness of the offense looks a lot better on a
defendant's record than the convictions that might result following trial. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
If a case goes to trial, the defendant might suffer with anxiety over whether he or she will get off or
be convicted and receive the maximum sentence. This can also come with the fear of humiliation
that is associated with spending time in jail and the likelihood of being separated from family and
friends. Going to trial can be risky because it is impossible to predict what a jury will decide. This is
because plea bargains are becoming more popular today. Seeing how a plea bargain can provide a
defendant with a sense of relief that is mainly caused by the uncertainty and possibility of being
charged with a

Plea Bargaining Pros And Cons
What is Plea Bargaining? Plea Bargaining is the pre–trial arrangement, which happens in a criminal
methodology. Amid this system, the respondent and has his lawyer sits on one side, and the
prosecutor is on the other. The litigant either consents to argue "blameworthy" or "no challenge" to a
wrongdoing. Another component for plea bargaining would likewise be because the respondent
uncovers data, for example, area of stolen merchandise, names of others taking part in the
wrongdoing or affirmation of different crime's, for example, a series of robberies. Consequently, a
decrease in charges, or rejection of a few charges, this must be endorsed by the judge, before
tolerating can occur. On the off chance that the judge does not concur, at that ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Still sometimes, prosecutors might be persuaded that they have the correct respondent and a totally
precise charge with respect to what crime(s) he or she carried out, but secure a conviction might be
flawed. This obviously is valuable for the two sides to mastermind a determination of the issue
without either side taking the risk that the body of evidence may conflict with them if it somehow
managed to go to trial.
It was likewise demonstrated in 1998, which 92 percent of the cases exhibited were returned by
Manhattan terrific juries. Measurement appears to help pundits ' claims that the fantastic jury is
minimal more than an elastic stamp...The lion 's share of postulations cases are settled through
request assertions; less than 10 percent really get to trial, and of those, the Manhattan District
Attorney 's Office guarantees a conviction rate of 75 to 80 percent (Berger 31).
In spite of the fact that request bartering might be valuable, there are a few people that may feel that
there are issues related with it. Steven Silberblatt states, "to be deliberate" inside the significance of
the Fifth Amendment an announcement by a criminal respondent must be a result of through and
through freedom, unrestricted by dangers or guarantees.
Pressure of any sort, regardless of whether physical or mental is prohibited...(Silberblatt). This being
the situation, why is the Criminal Justice framework allowed to make guarantees and

Plea Bargaining Process
Plea bargaining is a series of actions that result to an understanding between the prosecutor and the
defendant in connection to a particular case. It will require approval by the court. The process
typically results to a change in the plea of the defendant or the accused to a crime that has a lighter
consequence. The defendant or accused may also plead guilty to the original crime in exchange for
lesser charges of the original crime. Plea bargaining basically aims to lessen the sentence that the
accused will face for the crime in the event that the charges are proven in court.
The plea bargain process is normally done prior to the start of the trial itself. However, there are
some instances when plea bargaining can be carried out any ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The process minimizes potential problems from emerging. For instance, a prolonged trial process
may increase the possibility of crucial testimony not to be entered as evidence if the witnesses are
old people since there is a possibility that the witnesses will die before they testify. This will have a
serious effect on the verdict given by the judge.
6. Both the defendant and the prosecutor will benefit from a plea bargain since it helps avoid severe
sentencing or acquittal respectively.
7. It will not be necessary for the victim to wait for a long time before the defendant is sentenced by
the judge.
In addition to the advantages listed above, there are other considerations that can confirm the
suitability of using plea bargaining in the trial process.
The first consideration is to provide an incentive to defendants who acknowledge their wrongdoing.
The jurist plea bargaining process will encourage defendants to be responsible for their actions and
send them to a rehabilitation center that expedites their rehabilitation at a shorter period of time.
The second consideration is that plea bargaining provides a venue to resolve issues between the
defendant and the prosecutor. If their issues are not suitably resolved, they will go through the entire
trial court

Plea Agreement Advantages
Plea Agreement
Introduction
A plea agreement is when the defendant agrees to plead guilty and the prosecutor offers to either
reduce the charge to a less serious offense, drops a charge, or recommend a specific sentence to the
judge (Williams & Wilson, 1981). A plea agreement is more common than a case going to trial, in
2012, 97% of federal cases ended in plea bargains rather that going to trial (Goode, 2012). In the
case for Richard, there is no telling what the results would have been if he had a jury trial rather than
taking the plea agreement but it can be said that he made the correct decision by taking the plea.
Plea agreement vs jury trial There are several advantages to taking a plea agreement rather than
going to trial. One advantage ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
When he looks back on that decision, he believes that his lawyer convinced him to make the wrong
decision. It is unknown what the outcome of Richard's life would have been if he had taken his case
to trial, but it seems that the plea agreement was the correct way for him to go. Richard undeniably
murdered his mother. He was seventeen years old and was old enough to know that murder is
wrong. Richard did grow up in a household where he was mentally abused, but does that justify or
give him an out for killing his mother? A jury would have seen Richard's case in a few different
ways. One way they could have seen the case would be that Richard was an abused child, he did not
understand what he was doing, and he does not necessarily deserve to be punished for it. Another
way the jury could have seen his case would be that Richard was nearly an adult who murdered his
mother, hid the body, and then manipulated people into thinking that he was truly concerned about
his mothers whereabouts while the whole time knowing what he did. If the jury would have seen
Richard's case like that, he probably would have ended up with the maximum

Plea Bargains And The Plea Bargain
Plea–bargaining is known as a practice of negotiation where the prosecutor makes certain sacrifices
and gives a lesser charge or sentence to the defendant in exchange for a guilty plea. Plea–bargains
are done out of court, when one side begins to arrange a potential plea bargain. However the plea
bargain does not go through until both the prosecuting side and the defense agree on it
(Unconstitutionality). After both sides come to an agreement the plea bargain is brought before the
judge, however the judge does not have to follow the prosecutor's proposal. Some plea bargains may
have to get the approval of the court before being upheld (Unconstitutionality). In plea bargains the
defendants can plead guilty to some or all of the charges that ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Plea–bargains in criminal cases should not be used as much as they in today's justice system because
their drawbacks outweigh their benefits. Plea–bargaining has very few benefits followed by a
lengthy list of downsides when being used in criminal cases. One of the biggest drawbacks to plea–
bargaining is that defendants that are innocent sometimes plea guilty. Out of all criminal cases, 14%
to 25% of them result in false confessions from the defendants due to police tactics that are carried
out while the plea bargain is being discussed (Schneider). The defendant might also accept a plea
bargain to avoid going to court and getting convicted even though they 're innocent (Schulhofer).
Often times, defendants are worried that if their case goes to trial that they might lose because there
is not enough evidence proving their innocence, therefore, they plead guilty which results in a lesser
jail time for them. Plea bargains also do not allow for innocent defendants to get a chance to prove
their innocence in front of a jury. It denies the defendant the advantages of a strong defense and
results in undeserved punishments to innocent defendants that could win in trial (Schneider).
Although this may seem beneficial to the defendant, it is not, because a defendant usually fare better
in a jury trial since the prosecution has the burden of proof (Jolley). In the United States the justice
system should not allow innocent

Plea Bargains In Criminal Law
What is a plea bargain a person may ask? According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, a please
agreement is "an agreement by which someone accused of a crime admits to a less serious crime in
order to be given a less severe punishment." (Webster Dictionary). Plea bargain is the most critical
process in the criminal justice system. The Prosecutor may ask the defendant for a guilty plea in
exchange for a reduced or even suspended sentence. Now do you have to take the plea bargain when
the prosecutor offers it? The answer is no you don't but you have to stand trial. There are a lot of
benefits that comes with taking a plea deal. One is t makes the cases goes by faster. Also is that the
defendant may get their sentence reduced or sometimes even ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Many people are affected by the use of plea bargains in a positive way. For one defendants who
could be facing multiple charges and potential years in jail, has the potential to get multiple charges
dropped as well getting a significantly reduced sentence. In the judge's case, the advantage of
accepting a plea bargain agreement is that the judge does not need to schedule and hold a trial.
Judges also know about jails being overcrowded, so it is also in the public's interest to filter out the
people who don't need to be in jail for a long time out. The outcome of this process closes cases
quicker than the expected pace and also the court system would not be as overwhelmed with court
cases. One of the major reasons why people don't go to trial is because they realize receiving the
maximum charge if they go to trial will not be beneficial to them in the long run. Even those who
are never rearrested, getting a charge reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor can show to be a
critical benefit. Some employers may certainly not want to hire someone who was convicted of a
felony. Felony convictions may be used in certain court proceedings to discredit people who testify
as

Plea Bargains
There are three types of plea bargains, the first allows the defendant to enter a plea of guilty for
fewer charges, the second may provide a lesser sentence, and the third allows the defendant to enter
a plea of guilty to one charge while all other charges will be dismissed (Bohm & Haley, 2001).
There are three factors that the prosecution takes into consideration when debating a plea bargain,
the severity of the crime, the criminal record of the offender, and how strong the case is against the
offender.
The appearance of plea bargaining is it serves all parties involved in the court process, removing the
unpredictability of the time a trial may take and the ultimate outcome (Bohm & Haley, 2001). The
prosecution is benefited from a plea

Plea Bargains In Criminal Cases
During criminal cases, many prosecutors and attorneys struggle with trying to prove whether or not
the defendant committed the crime. Is there such a way to legally coerce the defendant to confess to
his or her crime? Enter the plea bargain. A plea bargain occurs when a defendant agrees to plea
guilty in exchange for a reduction of charges and a lighter sentence than what the crime usually
carries. Most people may see plea bargains as a boon to the defendant, but may end up hurting the
defendant. The courts always benefit from plea bargains either way, but the defendant must still
answer for their crimes.
Plea bargains are the result of a collaboration between the prosecutor, defendant, defense attorney
and judge. The prosecutor, who represents the state and determines the punishment of the crime, will
usually offer the plea bargain to the defense attorney. The defense attorney then explains to his or
her defendant the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However, plea bargains may not be all that great towards the defendant. A defendant might choose
to just plead guilty in order to not go through a lengthy trial process. The defendant may run the risk
of pleading guilty to something that he or she may or may have not committed. If the defendant is
innocent, they may ruin their record by pleading guilty to something that they did not do. Typically,
the public might perceive plea bargains as a form of legal coercion towards the defendant. This may
lead some to think that the plea bargain is just the criminal justice system's way of ruining the lives
of ordinary citizens because the counselors are literally bypassing the chance for a defendant to
defend themselves. If a defendant enters a plea bargain, they surrender their innocence. The courts
benefit tremendously from plea bargains, but the defendant is the one who truly has to pay for
everything. The defendant might receive a lighter sentence but they are the only receiving

Plea Bargain Analysis
Plea Bargain The purpose of a plea bargain is for the person being prosecuted to accept guilt. Plea
bargaining is a nontrial procedure for sentencing and denouncing individuals blamed for genuine
crime. A plea bargain waives his entitlement to trial in return for a more tolerant criminal
punishment. According to Langbein (1978) the prosecutor instigates a criminal blamed to admit
blame than would be forced if the denounced were mediated liable after trial. The prosecutor offers
leniency either directly, as a charge lessening, or in a roundabout way, through the conclusion of the
judge, as a suggestion for diminished sentence that the judge will take after. In return for getting this
mercy for the charged, the prosecutor is soothed of the need to demonstrate the denounced's blame,
and the court is saved adjudicating it. The court censures the blamed on the premise for his
admission, without free settling (Langbein, 1978). Pros of Plea Bargain ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
plea bargaining helps the State and Court to manage caseloads. Likewise, plea bargaining declines
the amount of work of prosecutors and allowing them to get prepared for more genuine cases by
leaving insignificant and easy charges that can be dealt with through a plea bargain. According to
the article from Occupy Theory (2014) plea bartering deliberately submits the accused before the
law without having a period expending and costly trial. From a point of view of criminal protection,
the most supportive advantage of this sort of agreement is to uproot the trial's instability. In helps the
litigant to ensure that they won't acquire more genuine accusations for the charged criminal acts
documented against them. On the off chance that for occurrence the indictment is weak, or if the
court needs legitimate proofs or witnesses and the result is absolution, the arraignment may have the
likelihood of discovering the charged individual's

Plea Bargain
Over the years plea bargaining has become the way for the Administration of Justice in America and
Canada's criminal trials. Accused criminals are giving up the rights to a fair trial, to indeed plead
guilty, in order to receive a much lesser charge, more comfortable prison, or even to agree to testify
against someone else. Fewer than ten percent of criminal cases brought up by the federal
government even make it to the federal courts to be tried before juries each year. "According to one
legal scholar, every two seconds during a typical workday, a criminal case is disposed of in an
American courtroom by way of a guilty plea or nolo contendere plea" (Lynch, par. 1). Which
ultimately means more than ninety percent of criminal cases are ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
6). This would leave the court system plenty behind and nearly almost impossible to attend to each
case. Plea bargaining is essential to court cases and must be done (Emerick), stated attorney Samuel
Buccero. "The court is not set up to have multiple trials. The dockets are set up to be done in less
than an hour" (Emerick), Buccero said.
Plea bargaining may have advantages in America's and Canada's Justice System, but it also proposes
an advantage for the accused criminal. It gives the defendant the opportunity to reduce sentence and
provide a better, more comfortable stay in correctional facilities. It gives the opportunity for guilty
criminals, who know a guilty sentence will be there if facing a jury, to plead guilty to the case for
one's own benefits. Rather than spending time presenting a losing case in front of a judge and jury,
and losing plenty of money in court fees, the case can be wrapped up in a matter of agreement.
Guilty defendants seem to be in a win–win situation and can use plea bargaining as a total
advantage.
While plea bargaining proposes plenty of advantages through the court of law in America and
Canada, it shows some disadvantages as well. First off, plea bargaining seems unlawful to many.
Every American is entitled to a right to a fair trial by the court of law. Giving the opportunity to plea
bargain is taking away from those constitutional rights. Defendants

The Plea Bargain Is A Vital Part Of The Criminal Justice...
The plea bargain is a vital part of the criminal justice system today. Before the 1800s when an
offender was caught there would be a trial and verdict. The plea bargain are for defendant 's to plead
guilty to a lesser offense or to at least one charge especially if there are multiple indictments.
Defendants will plead guilty in hopes of leniency, and at least 90 percent of criminal cases end in a
plea bargains. A majority of criminal cases in many jurisdictions will end in a plea bargaining. In the
case North Carolina v. Alford, Mr. Alford is accused of Capital murder. The penalty for a guilty plea
is imprisonment for life, however, if the defendant pleads innocent and the jury rules him guilty the
death penalty attaches. Prior to the trial, Mr. Alford accepted a plea bargain. The bargaining requires
him to plead guilty to murder in the second degree, the penalty of which is 30 years.
Later on Alford does appeals his case, stating that his agreement to the bargain was involuntary as it
was driven by fear of the death penalty. Mr. Alford 's conviction was overturned however, the
Supreme Court states that a guilty plea is a voluntary decision and is not "compelled" within his
Fifth Amendment rights of Self–Incrimination. In a 6 to 3 decision, the Court then reverses the
appeal and reinstates his conviction. This is a great example of how the option of plea bargaining
continues to be controversial. This case shows how plea bargaining can work both in favor and
negatively

Probation and Punishment Essay
Is Kris able to come back to society after probation?
Kris Young is 25 years old, and got into some trouble at age 13and received probation for a case
involving battery. While Kris was on probation he was arrested for criminal trespass and he had
received additional probation time. Some of my results from the file review did not match Roberts.
Two views in which Robert and I had the same were giving Kris and extension for probation period
beyond the original two years. Because Kris fail to pay his fine amount within the stipulated period
and was giving the extension so that he will have time to pay off his fine. Another view in which
was the same was Kris having a successful completion of his probation was the same, because he
got ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Probation reports and recommendations remain in your court file forever, although they are kept
confidential from the general public without a court order. The majority of criminal cases are
resolved by way of a plea bargain. Plea bargains (also known as negotiated dispositions, plea
agreements, or deals) involve the defendant entering a plea of guilty (or no contest) to one or more
charges, usually lesser charges, in exchange for a promise of a substantially reduced sentence. But
even when the prosecutor and the attorney cut a deal, sentencing is always decided by the court.
Sometimes, a client will go to trial and be found guilty of one or more of the charges. This, too, may
involve lesser charges to those of which he or she was originally accused.
When either of these things happens, either a plea bargain or a guilty verdict, the defendant is
referred to probation by the court, because the judge usually does not know enough about the
defendant or the nature of the offense to make an informed and intelligent decision about the
sentence.
When the client is referred to probation is when the probation officer's work begins. The PO
conducts an investigation, prepares a report, and makes the recommendation as to what the judge
should do at sentencing. As mentioned earlier, the court is free to follow the recommendation
contained in the report, or deviate from it, but the report and recommendation is always

Pros And Cons Of Plea Bargain
Brittany, I agree that there is good and bad that comes from bedsheeting and plea bargaining.
However, it seems as though the government receives more of the good from the tactics, as citizens
receive more of the bad from the tactics. Regarding the good, you mentioned plea deals reduce the
strain upon the judicial system by reducing the number of trials that must occur. In addition to that,
they assure a conviction, which looks good for the prosecutor, and lighten their caseload (Levenson,
2013). As for the defendant being overcharged, accepting a plea bargain provides them the
opportunity for a lighter sentence on a less severe charge, and fewer or less serious offenses listed
on their criminal record. For the defense attorney's, they get to do less work and still get paid the
same amount of money. For the correctional system, a plea deal may reduce the amount of inmates
entering a facility as jail time can be suspended as a condition of the plea bargain (Levenson, 2013).
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I would like to add to these negatives that defendants who are not actually guilty of the crime, will
sometimes take the lighter sentence instead of asserting their constitutional right to a fair trial
because they cannot afford top notch legal defense (Levenson, 2013). Some others who are not
actually guilty of the crime will accept the plea bargain because they are afraid of being convicted
and want to spend the lesser time incarcerated. Lastly, a big negative regarding overcharging and
plea bargaining is that once a defendant pleads guilty, they forfeit their opportunity to appeal their
case at a later date (Levenson,

Plea Bargains Essay
A plea bargain ("offer") is an agreement in a criminal case whereby the prosecuting agency may
offer the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty, usually to a lesser charge or to the original
criminal charge with a proposal of a lighter than the maximum sentence. This opportunity allows
defendants to avoid the risk of a conviction at trial on a more serious charge. This also allows all
involved parties to keep the court's calendars light without exhausting resources of a court, potential
public defenders, and prosecutors who are all salaried for by the expense of tax payers. If every case
in the criminal justice system went to trial, the courts would be so overloaded that they would
effectively be shut down. An offer can occur at any ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Prosecutors may only "recommend" to the court the acceptance of a plea arrangement. The court
will usually take proofs to ensure that the above three components are satisfied and will then
generally accept the recommendation of the prosecution. The court uses the plea bargaining process
as a way to alleviate the need to schedule and hold a trial on an already congested court calendar.
Judges are also aware of jail/prison overcrowding and may be receptive to the "processing out" of
offenders who are not likely to do much jail time anyway. For prosecutors, a lightened caseload is
equally attractive. Most importantly, an offer assures a conviction, even if it is for a lesser charge or
crime. This ensures that the prosecuting agency keeps its statistics looking good, and keeps the
confidence alive inside the community. No matter how strong the evidence may be, no case is a
predetermined conclusion. Prosecutors are often at risk of waging a long and expensive trial with a
chance of losing, similar to that of the O.J Simpson murder trial. Prosecutors may use plea
bargaining as means to advance their case against a co–defendant. They may accept a plea bargain
arrangement from one defendant in return for damaging testimony against another. This way, they
are assured of at least one conviction even if it's a lesser charge with the enhanced chances of
captivating a conviction against the second defendant. A

Plea Bargains and Mandatory Sentencing Essay
Plea Bargains and Mandatory Sentencing
I would like to take this time to explain my position on Plea Bargains and Mandatory Sentencing. I
will show both pros and cons for each topic, as well as give you my personal brief on which one I
support.
There are two types of plea bargains : The first one is a charge bargain. When the prosecutor allows
a defendant to "plead guilty to a lesser charge", or to only some of the charges that have been
filed against him. For example, a defendant charged with burglary may be offered the opportunity to
plead guilty to "attempted burglary". A defendant charged with Drunk Driving and
Driving with License Suspended may be offered the opportunity to plead guilty to just the drunk
driving ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I do not agree that we should offer someone a sentence bargain. If the individual committed the
crime then he/she should have to do the time. So, when Justice Stewart wrote in Blackledge v.
Allison that plea bargaining "can benefit all concerned", I think that is only partly correct. Sure it
benefits defendants, prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges, but what about the victims or their
families. I like what District Attorney Gibbons was trying to do, if it was all or none with no
exceptions. The only time that I feel that plea bargains should not be used is in any murder or rape
charge.
The second thing we must look at is mandatory sentencing. I agree that we should have mandatory
sentencing. You can read different studies that it does not work and it takes power away from
judges. Sometimes trial rates and sentencing delays occur because of mandatory sentencing. Just
think of how many repeat offenders we would have if it was not in place. I do think that it is
somewhat of a deterrent for the small time users on the street. Research has shown that it is the low–
level street dealers, mules and addicts that this affects most, but if we didn't start with them then
where? You must punish the user just as much as the dealer or "kingpins". The dealers would not
have any business if it was not for the users and if we can get to them easier than the main dealers,
than I am all for mandatory sentencing.
As you can see I'm for mandatory sentencing and for

Disadvantages Of Plea Bargain
According to Black's Law Dictionary (2009), a plea bargain is a "negotiated agreement between a
prosecutor and a criminal defendant whereby the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser offense ... in
exchange for some concession by the prosecutor ... a more lenient sentence or a dismissal of other
charges" (p. 1173) As clarified in Schmalleger (2007), such a procedure is helpful to all parties. A
request deal is to the greatest advantage of a resistance group in the event that they feel they can't
win a quittance and prosecutors will decide to request deal in the event that they feel their proof is
frail. The blamed advantages from the likelihood for "lessened on the other hand consolidated
charges, reduced barrier costs, and a lower sentence than might have generally been expected" (p.
312). The casualties additionally start to reestablish their lives to some kind of commonality. In spite
of the fact that there was a suggestion by the National Advisory Commission on Criminal ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
380). Nardulli (1986) concentrated on request dealing in nine medium measured districts in Illinois,
Michigan and Pennsylvania. He thought about the request deals got by different sorts of lawyers–
secretly held or freely paid. He found that there were few measurably huge contrasts and in this
manner reasoned that the consequences of request dealing were sensibly reliable. In these regions, at
any rate, the outcomes depended more on nearby standards and practices than on the kind of lawyer.
While request dealing might be seen with suspicion by a great part of the open, given the measure of
wrongdoing and the present structure of our legal framework and accessible assets, it is unrealistic
to vanish at any point in the near future. Judges must stay constant in checking request dealing to
guarantee equity is served to all, paying little heed to race, shading, sex or economic

Violation Of 'Bargain In The Film The Plea'
In the film "The Plea" it tells stories about how the plea bargain screws over everyday people and
pressure them into taking the bargain. This is a huge problem because people are being convinced
by their defense attorneys to take a plea bargain. This is what most people will do because it will get
them a lesser charge, and out of jail if they are waiting there for their trial. One problem is that
prosecutors are considered untouchable. A second thing wrong with this system is that prosecutors
try to convince their clients to take plea bargains. Thirdly the Brady violation is another way that
there is misconduct with prosecutors.
Prosecutorial misconduct is a problem that needs to be fixed, but shows no signs of that problem
becoming fixed. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They might do this by intimidating the witnesses or even threatening them. One of the most
common misconducts is the Brady violation. This is when the prosecution withholds vital evidence
to either someone's' conviction or to someone's freedom. This is the most common and one of the
most shocking ways that misconduct can happen. This ties into the first point, and that if there was
actual sever legal punishment that would come out of it, there would be less of this going on in the
court system. It happens too much for something not to be done about it.
When the criminal justice system relies on plea bargaining it can really have negative effects. People
will tend to think that it is the only way about going at cases. It also makes the criminal justice
system seem lazy in the way that 95 percent of cases end in some kind of plea bargain. At the same
time though, that can make it look more efficient. Being able to have that many convictions in that
little of time can look

Plea Bargain Pros And Cons
Does plea bargaining sacrifice the rights of the defendant, or do the guilty benefit? Unfortunately,
there isn't a clear and cut answer to this as every circumstance presents its own unique obstacles.
However, in my opinion and personal expertise, a plea bargain has the substantial potential to
sacrifice the rights of the defendant because it may charge innocent people guilty. Even if one is
innocent, they may feel pressured to accept a plea as opposed to taking the case to trial and
potentially exacerbating the legal repercussions. The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution
guarantees the right to a fair trial, however, how does one evaluate fairness when "more than 90
percent of criminal convictions come from negotiated please"? (Thomson Reuters, 2017). Plea
bargains cause poor investigations and case preparations because attorneys aren't going the extra
mile to fight for justice, rather, Americans are settling for pleas to crimes that they did not commit.
Plea bargains take the focus from the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I also believe that plea bargains should not rectify 90% of all criminal cases. Thankfully, the 6th
Amendment of the United States Constitution allows us to fight for a fair trial, however, my
argument is that accused aren't always thoroughly educated on their options. I have a belief that
attorneys and the court system may pressure one to accept a plea bargain for terms on convenience
rather than basing sentences of the stone–cold facts and that isn't fair to our fellow Americans. Even
though we have the right to request a fair trial, research shows that prosecutors use their ability to
vary the charges to seek longer mandatory sentences for people who turn down plea bargains.
Defendants who go to trial receive sentences that, on average, are three times as long. Not
surprisingly, 97 percent of drug defendants are convicted by pleas, not trial (Fellner,

Plea Bargaining Argumentative Analysis
Plea bargaining is an arrangement between a prosecutor and defendant, whereby the defendant
pleads guilty to a charge in order to be given a less severe punishment (Merriam–Webster, 2016).
There are two main reasons why plea bargaining continues to play a role in the justice system; it
claims to increase certainty and save the time and expenses of a criminal trial. Although plea
bargaining has been proven to be effectual, there are many negative effects of plea bargaining.
It is morally and ethically wrong because the option of negotiating a crime that should be punishable
to the full extent of the law is unconstitutional.
It also does not provide benefits for individuals who are innocent.
Plea bargaining also does not provide justice to ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Plea bargains compromise justice by allowing the guilty to receive minimal sentences for heinous
crimes and instills fear in the innocent. The implication that crimes are tolerable causes criminals to
only be held responsible for a small portion of the crime. Karla Homolka and Paul Bernardo, known
as the "Ken and Barbie killers", raped numerous teenage girls in the Scarborough area from 1987 to
1995 when they were finally convicted. These two individuals remain one of the most notorious
killers in Canada's history because of their unjustifiable murders to three young women, including
Homolka's own little sister. Paul Bernardo, often referred to as the "Scarborough Rapist", began
raping women in the Scarborough area (MacQuarrie 239). When Homolka and Paul met each other,
she encouraged his sexual fantasies and played a major role in the raping and murders of three
teenage girls; Tammy Homolka, 15, Leslie Mahaffy, 14, and Kristen French, 15 (Mellor 312–318).
In 1990, Homolka and Bernardo took the life of Karla's fifteen year old sister, Tammy Homolka.
Karla wanted to give Tammy's, her younger sisters, virginity to Paul for Christmas, hence, they
caused her to be highly intoxicated and slipped valium into her drink. Subsequently, they vaginally
and anally raped her for about a minute until she began to vomit. Tammy choked on her own vomit
and died as a result of this

Essay 2: The Plea Bargain
If you were accused of a crime that you did not do would you fight for your innocence or perhaps
take a plea bargain? One's first instincts may be to have faith that the justice system will find you
innocent but this is not always the case and many accused people end up taking a plea bargain. A
plea bargain or plea agreement is defined by Verdun–Jones (2016) as "an agreement by the accused
to plead guilty in return for the prosecutor's agreeing to take or refrain from taking a particular your
of action" (p. 169), to illustrate one may take a plea bargain to have a shorter sentence. This essay is
going to explore why it may be better for a plea bargain to be discussed in an open court in front of a
judge but also what problems this might cause and finally whether or not a victim should have ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
To begin, most accused people have little to no understanding of how the justice system works or
what a plea bargain consists of. In the film "The Plea" it describes that the public's grasp of the
criminal justice system is defined by television and that jury trials are frequent in determining
whether someone is guilty or innocent (Bikel & Ofra, 2004). In reality, 91 percent of adult criminal
cases settle without going to trial and the most common reasons is the entry of a guilty plea
(Verdun–Jones, 2016, p. 169). This is why I believe it would be an improvement if the determining
of a plea bargain was done in an open court and not behind closed doors in order to keep the accused
informed and aware of what they are agreeing to. Further more, a trial judge has to be content that
the accused person understands the plea and is pleading guilty voluntarily (Verdun–Jones, 2016, p.
175). With this in mind, if all discussion of the plea are done in an open court, a judge can see first
hand that the accused understands the arrangements of the plea bargain and is

Plea Bargain Advantages

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Kristen Stacey

More from Kristen Stacey (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Plea Bargain Advantages