Plea Bargaining
Many references found on the subject of plea bargaining project the same message as to why the process has become such a common element of the justice system. The universal missive seems to be advantage for all parties involved, even the victim. There are obvious advantages in terms of time and cost for the judicial system. For judges and prosecutors, plea bargaining provides relief to hectic schedules and an overcrowded docket. Any case resolved outside of the court setting can also ease the burden on limited funds and personnel. Another benefit for prosecutors is the assurance of a conviction, whereas a trial offers the possibility of acquittal. For the defendant, a plea bargain usually involves a lesser charge on their record and a
…show more content…
In his January 15, 2013 article “Dramatic Increase in Percentage Criminal Cases Being Plea Bargained,” Matt Clarke writes that sentencing power is gradually shifting from judges to prosecutors. Because of legislation that allows prosecutors to determine the statutes under which to charge a defendant, an increased coercive effect has been created. Defendants who may have winnable cases or even those who may be innocent opt for accepting plea agreements because they are convinced the risk of going to trial is too great. This shift has resulted in a noticeable reduction in the number of cases being tried by a jury. According to Clarke’s article, some experts say the number of federal criminal defendants who choose a trial over plea bargaining has decreased, since 1977, from twenty-five percent to about three percent. Another factor for possible decreases in trial cases is the risk of ‘annoying’ a judge. Defendants may be foregoing their constitutional right to trial by jury because they fear retribution. “There are some judges who will punish you for going to trial,” acknowledged Bill Cervone, the state attorney in Florida and former head of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association. “Legally, you cannot impose a longer sentence on someone because they exercised their right to trial. Factually, there are ways to do it.” (Prison Legal
In his January 15, 2013 article “Dramatic Increase in Percentage Criminal Cases Being Plea Bargained,” Matt Clarke writes that sentencing power is gradually shifting from judges to prosecutors. Because of legislation that allows prosecutors to determine the statutes under which to charge a defendant, an increased coercive effect has been created. Defendants who may have winnable cases or even those who may be innocent opt for accepting plea agreements because they are convinced the risk of going to trial is too great. This shift has resulted in a noticeable reduction in the number of cases being tried by a jury. According to Clarke’s article, some experts say the number of federal criminal defendants who choose a trial over plea bargaining has decreased, since 1977, from twenty-five percent to about three percent. Another factor for possible decreases in trial cases is the risk of ‘annoying’ a judge. Defendants may be foregoing their constitutional right to trial by jury because they fear retribution. “There are some judges who will punish you for going to trial,” acknowledged Bill Cervone, the state attorney in Florida and former head of the Florida Prosecuting Attorneys Association. “Legally, you cannot impose a longer sentence on someone because they exercised their right to trial. Factually, there are ways to do it.” (Prison Legal