A courtroom workgroup is considered an informal group between the criminal prosecutor, the defense lawyer, and a judicial officer. The theory of the workgroup has four concepts: Secrecy, Collegiality, Speed, and Pragmatic Cynicism. In the workgroups defendants are presumed to be guilty and the group works towards processing rather than seeking justice. The daily interaction of the workgroup is similar and associated with plea bargains. The prosecutor is responsible for giving the state’s case against the defendant. The prosecutor uses prosecutorial discretion to either charge or not charge a person with an offense. The prosecutor examines the strength of the incriminating evidence decides if the witnesses would be credible to the case. If the prosecutor determines the evidence is enough to try the case, work for a plea deal, or not enough at all so he or she dismisses the case. If criteria for taking a case were more stringent then criminals could get away with crimes because the prosecutors office did not give the jurors a chance to hear the evidence and witness. The opposite is said if the criteria were less stringent in that the prosecutor’s office might try a case that was not strong enough leaving the jurors to find not guilty when a plea bargain could have been reached instead. Also if found not guilty and stronger evidence came along later the prosecutor’s office cannot retry the case once the defendant was already found not guilty. A change to the courtroom work group would be lessening the load of the public defenders. The raising of requirement for more established lawyers to offer probono could help lessen the caseload of public defenders.