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 never tried, and proven to the juries in the court of law? Plea bargaining has shown throughout the years many advantages and disadvantages in the court of law, but is plea bargaining ethical and should it continue to be practiced in criminal cases throughout America and Canada?
First of all, plea bargaining works in criminal cases as what one can call a threat on the defendant. It is a promise by court that if the defendant pleads guilty to the charge, the defendant will be granted with a lesser charge then what may be given if the defendant decides to try the case before a jury. Each side of the case gives up something and gets something back in return (Taylor, par. 5). For example, if a person is convicted for a felony robbery charge, in which requires a minimum sentence of five years in prison, the criminal is given the opportunity under the court of law to comply with the courts. If the criminal decides to comply and plead guilty to the charge, the criminal may be granted only two years in prison. Once the deal is accepted by the court and lawyers, it is then passed on to the courts judgment, in which sentencing and conviction being the most important issues. Plea bargaining is not guaranteed however, the judge may...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document