“Plea bargaining is a process through which a defendant pleads guilty to a criminal charge with the expectation of receiving some consideration of the state” (Neubauer, 2008, Ch. 13, p.323, ¶ 1). Plea bargaining comes in many forms and controversy remains at the forefront due to the public misconception that plea bargaining lets the offender off easy and that it doesn’t give true justice to the victims of the crime (Neubauer, 2008).
There are three types of plea bargaining; charge bargaining, count bargaining, and sentence bargaining. Charge bargaining is when a person who is charged with a crime will cut a deal with the prosecutor to allow them to plead to a lesser charge than what was initially filed. In reducing the charges, the defendant will have to serve less time for the offense. In essence, it could mean the difference in time and status upon re-entry into society (Neubauer, 2008).
Some people would agree that having a felony could tarnish their records making it difficult to participate in certain activities in society such as obtaining good jobs. If a person pleads to a misdemeanor from a felony, the prosecutor is doing them an even bigger favor than what they had thought especially if they will be eligible to re-enter society (Neubauer, 2008).
.At the other end of the spectrum, if a person murdered someone and pleas from first-degree murder to manslaughter it could mean the difference in where they are placed inside the prison. The could be the determining factor of whether they are on death row or in the general prison population, where they will have the possibility to be eligible for possible parole (Neubauer, 2008).
Count bargaining is when a person who is charged with a crime will cut a deal with the prosecutor to plead guilty to some of the charges on the initial indictment which, in effect, reduces the sentence which would be imposed if they had decided to go through a criminal trial. It is usually used in when various charges were accumulated through one criminal act (Neubauer, 2008).
This makes sense because in reality, if a person goes through trial and is given a term that is over the life expectancy of a human, than what is the use in imposing a sentence of this type? In using count bargaining, it alleviates the need for a trial and when the person is convicted of the lesser charges, they will receive a sentence that can actually be served.
Sentencing bargaining is when the prosecutor offers to recommend a lesser sentence in exchange for the defendant’s guilty plea. In making agreements on sentencing, for the defendant it could mean the difference between serving the sentence in prison or serving the sentence within society with supervision of a probation officer. Even though it seems that justice is not being served in this manner, if the crime is severe and the offender has no chance to get out of prison anyways, the sentencing reduction in effect serves the prosecution better (Neubauer, 2008).
People who oppose plea bargaining believe that defendants rights are being violated. However, their disapproval is displaced because the defendant and the defense attorney are all well aware of the charges and the possible consequences of the case going to trial. If the defense attorney is present during the bargaining phase (which they should be) than they are responsible for ensuring that the deal is good.
If there are any deprivation to rights than it would be because of their representation or misrepresentation, and not because of the plea agreement. They are responsible for making sure that the client knows exactly what the plea agreement states, and all that is involved with it. As far as the right to a speedy trial claim, if the defendant was well informed than they will understand that they give up the right to have a trial and along with the agreement that was made with the prosecutor.
In plea bargaining both parties benefit. The defendant could receive requests that may include reduction in charges, time, prison placement, allowances, or re-entry into society. It also benefits the defendant who knows that they will definitely found guilty of the charge. Prosecutors also benefit as well as society in cases that may involve the identification of missing person’s, or information involving a cold case. In addition, it alleviates caseloads, saves time, and keeps the court dockets clear (Neubauer, 2008).
While people believe that plea bargaining can cause corruption and unfairness through inflating charges and being lenient on offenders to gain information that they otherwise may not have had, the defendant is the one who ends up benefitting the most out of the two entities; they are the ones who broke the law, they are lucky that we live in a society that allows them to have input on how their cases proceed. In other countries, they may not have been afforded this opportunity that even some of the citizens in our society believe that they do not deserve.
Reference:
- Neubauer, D.W. (2008). American courts and the criminal justice system. 9th ed. Thomson Learning, Inc.
