Plea Bargaining

            Question 1

            Plea bargain gained a fresh acceptance in the begging of 20th century because the prosecutors as well as the courts were trying to address the influx of court cases which was overwhelming (Lahny, 2014). However inducements had been abolished by the beginning of the 18th century in the law of English in the quest of preventing justice miscarriage. Plea bargaining in America has been in existence for centuries now. In the previous legal systems confession was the routine of convictions since the existing law at that period was in support of confession by criminals. Accordingly the history of bargain plea in united stated resulted in the courts allowing pleas withdrawal as well as pleas rejection but despite this such activities continuously occurred behind the permit (Lahny, 2014).  Federal prosecutions were eradicated in 1930 which were under the act of prohibition.  The federal prosecutions had become eight times more in comparison to the pending cases in 1914.  Despite the fact that more that 90% of the convictions were footed upon plea bargaining by the year 1930 the American courts remained unenthusiastic   for a particular period of time in endorsing these when appeals were made (Lahny, 2014).

            The legal grounding and the bargaining plea constitutionality was developed in 1970 by Brady versus United States (Lahny, 2014).  The supreme court of the United States made the warning based on the identical decision that the establishment was a conditional thing and therefore it necessitated appropriate protections as well as utilization.  Namely that an incentives plea that is large enough to overrule the abilities of the defendant to act in a freeway  or utilized in a manner that generates a rise in the  significant number of  individuals who were innocent who pleaded guilty  may lead to a prohibition due to constitutionality concern.  Prior the Supreme Court had stated in United States versus Jackson that if the law holds the capability of imposing fear that is unwarranted to the defendant it was unconstitutional. This is because the law would discourage the ability of an individual to practice their rights that are provided by the constitution according to the 6th amendment which holds the right of jury protection.  This would thus cause the defendant to act as a witness who holds no will which was a violation of the 5th amendment (Lahny, 2014).

            The 1970 ruling was crucial in presenting a distinction between Brady and other previous cases which emphasized confessions that were inappropriate thus laying several guidelines that would help in determining validity of a plea (Lahny, 2014).   This stated that any plea must not be influenced by threats, the defendant by hold full knowledge of the implications, the bargaining plea is not a complete proof in comparison to court trials and if the judgment is reconsidered the plea would be termed as invalid (Lahny, 2014).

Question 2

            The bargaining plea was first utilized in 1970 in the case of Brady versus the United States (Lahny, 2014).

            Question 3

            Currently, the plea bargain is an important section of the criminal system of justice in America this is mainly because most of the cases in America which amount to 90% in numerous jurisdictions are resolved via the utilization of some kind of bargain plea (Mackenzie,Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2014).  The major fact in regard to the justice system in America is that 97% of convictions made on criminal are resulted by negotiations of bargain plea (Mackenzie,Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2014).  In America therefore the jury trails which most individuals believe to be the main  influence or determinant  of the guilt or the innocence of the defendant has now become a very rare case,.  The plea bargaining are  growing  because  the verdict of a guilty defendant may serve a longer sentence at a jury or court trial as compared to a  plea bargain.  Most individuals therefore believe that it is a more better option in regard to judgment despite the fact that one is forced to admit to several charges in the quest for a reduced sentence.

            Question 4

            According to, Mackenzie,Vincent, & Zeleznikow, (2014), 97% of all the world’s federal cases are resolved through the utilization of plea negotiation bargain.  Most of the state’s cases are completed through plea bargaining which results in 94% where the defendants have been established to have plea lesser charges guiltiness in order to acquire a reduced sentence as their conviction.  97% of all the justice system cases occur in plea negotiation because it is associated with less hustles as well as efficiency (Mackenzie,Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2014). In addition most of the defendants prefer to utilize the system because it is effective in representing their interests despite the fact that the prosecutor is left will all the authority in regard to the case.

            Question 5

            American in general utilizes plea bargaining more often as compared to other nations that are in Europe of even Canada. In American Michigan, Indiana and New Jersey utilizes less of plea negotiations. Colorado state and California are the most uses of the negotiation plea.  Only three of the American states that have not utilized the plea negotiation strategy to the present. This therefore shows why America is the leading state in regard to the utilization of plea negotiations in both state as well as federal cases (Gorr, 2000). 

            Question 6

            Plea bargaining is mainly utilized in domestic as well as social offenses. This is because the victims may not be willing to testify in court and therefore they opt to engage in a plea bargain to extract information from the offenders in pleading whether they are guilty or not.  The prosecutors may additionally not be wishing to file charges against the offender based on their network and therefore in order to ensure that the offender does not offend more they are therefore forced to negotiate (Fisher, 2007).  Over ninety percent of the cases are completed in negotiated pleas and this implies that only less that 10% of these cases are resolved in trial courts (Mackenzie,Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2014). Bargain plea generates a gap amid theory and practice in the system of criminal justice. This is because with the plea of guilty the process of justice is achieved through focusing on the defender as well as the prosecutor.  90% of individuals believe that the bargaining plea hinders the ability of achieving justice as the prosecution process does not try to establish facts fully (Mackenzie,Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2014).  Bargaining plea is commonly utilized in America as it is a notion that has been accepted adequately.  This is despite the fact that most individuals do not believe that it serves the desires of all the parties that are involved.

            Question 7

            A bargaining plea does not serve the interests of every party that is involved in a case.  This is because the plea fails in serving the interests and the rights of the victims because when the offenders serve reduced sentences this means that justice has not been achieved.  The offenders are able to serve a sentence that the type of crime they committed is not justifiable as they plead guilty to reduced charges. The criminal justice  is purposed to providing full protection to all the involved  parties but the bargaining plea seems to serve the interests of the one party depending on whether the defendant is guilty or not.  This is because the defendants are forced to comply with the verdict and the interests of the criminal justice are achieved as the plea ensures that there is flow of prosecution processes (Gorr, 2000).

            Question 8

            If bargaining plea were not permitted the justice criminal system would be faced with severe implication.  Mass incarceration issue would rise rapidly as most of the offenders would be sentenced for longer period thus causing incarceration (Lahny, 2014). In addition the denial of bargaining plea would result in financial complication as the release bound for the victim’s causes financial strains.  This would additionally necessitate higher financial investment by the justice system in developing more prison structures as well as utilizing more resources in providing services like rehabilitation, training programs as well as reforms initiatives.  Injustice would additionally rise in the   criminal system of justice as most individuals would serve fewer sentences based on discrimination and even corruption (Lahny, 2014).

            In my opinion, the bargaining plea is no doubt a good strategy as it permits the criminal justice to operate in a more efficient way that it would be expected to.  However, the approach is unfavorable because all the authority lies with the case prosecutor. This, therefore, works against a defendant because they are forced to agree with the terms of the prosecutors in order to ease their verdicts which are the sentence term (Mackenzie, Vincent, & Zeleznikow, 2014).  Jury’s plea might additionally provide prosecutors with an encouragement to restrain their charging decisions by harnessing the prosecutors wish to get out of the cases quickly. After conducting the research my opinion in the context of plea bargaining because I understood that it ensures that it ensures that the justice system is effective.  In addition, it helps in ensuring that the criminal system of justice is not faced with severe implications. Moreover, I believe that the plea bargaining is the best strategy in reducing the justice system modernity issues globally as it seeks in ensuring efficiency.

            In conclusion, The general public views the bargaining plea as an injustice promotion as punishment is not based on the crime seriousness  but it is based on the ability of the defender to negotiate in a proper way and attain  prosecution that holds lesser charges.  The bargaining plea is viewed as a way for offenders to break laws because the approach permits them to receive punishments that are lowered as compared to what they would receive in a court trial.  This can thus be termed as justice denial because the offenders receive punishments that are not equivalent to their crimes and therefore the victims are not offered adequate protection by law. The bargaining plea is not well accepted by most individuals as it is termed as a way of sacrificing quality in order to achieve a lowered quantity as well as justice administration effectiveness. Despite the fact that plea bargaining has helped the criminal justice in attaining efficiency and speed injustice provision the strategy is highly critiqued.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

            Fisher, T. (2007). Criminal Law, the Boundaries of Plea Bargaining: Negotiating Standard Proof. Pdf

Gorr, M. (2000). The Morality of Plea Bargaining. Social Theory and Practice. Pdf

Lahny R. Silva. (2014). Right to Counsel and Plea Bargaining Gideon’s Legacy Continues. Pdf

            Mackenzie, G., Vincent, A., & Zeleznikow J. (2014). Negotiating About Charges and Pleas: Balancing Interests and Justice. 2014.  Pdf