Presentation on theme: "1 Negotiated Justice and the Plea of Guilty Chapter Thirteen."— Presentation transcript:
1 Negotiated Justice and the Plea of Guilty Chapter Thirteen
2 Plea Bargaining The process through which a defendant pleads guilty to a criminal charge with the expectation of receiving some consideration from the state.
3 Types of Plea Bargaining Charge Bargaining: –Pleading guilty to a less serious charge than the one originally charged. Count Bargaining: –Pleading guilty to partial charges, or “counts,” but not all. Sentence Bargaining: –A plea in exchange for leniency in sentencing. –The defendant pleads to the original charge (plea on the nose).
4 Who is Involved in the Plea Bargaining Process? Prosecutor –Some prosecutors deliberately overcharge to improve their bargaining position. –Plea bargaining represents the certainty of conviction without the risks of trial. Defendant –There is a possibility of a lenient sentence. Defense Attorney Judge –Have very little power in the plea bargaining process.
5 Considerations Seriousness of the offense Criminal record Strength of the prosecutor’s case
6 Bordenkircher v. Hayes It is not a violation of due process for a prosecutor to threaten defendants with other criminal prosecutions so long as the prosecutor has probable cause to believe that the accused has committed the offense.
7 Plea Bargaining Promises Santobello v. New York: When a plea rests in any significant degree on a promise or agreement of the prosecutor, so that it can be said to be a part of the inducement or consideration, such promise must be fulfilled. Ricketts v. Adamson: Defendants must live up to their end of the plea agreement.
8 Accepting the Plea Boykin v. Alabama: When a defendant enters a plea of guilty, the judge must determine if the plea is knowingly entered and completely voluntary. Brady v. U.S.: When a defendant pleads guilty to avoid the death penalty, the plea is voluntary. Alford v. North Carolina: A defendant can plead guilty and claim innocence.
9 More Plea Bargaining Case Law Alabama v. Smith: Court may impose a harsher sentence after a guilty verdict than it originally did at the plea proceeding (after defendant successfully vacated his original guilty plea). U.S. v. Mezzanatto: Federal prosecutors may use statements made by a defendant during plea bargaining to cross-examine the defendant at trial. U.S. v. Ruiz: Prior to the plea of guilty, the prosecutor does not have to disclose to the defense as much evidence as before trial.