Trials involve a much greater commitment of the prosecutor’s time and resources. It has been argued, and there is some empirical support for the idea, that prosecutors favor resolving cases by plea bargaining as opposed to trials. Each of these participants has self-interests outside the merits of the case that might distort the plea bargaining process. Self-Interests of the BargainersĬertain influences on plea bargaining that are exogenous to the merits of the case affect all the major participants-prosecutor, defense attorney/defendant, and judge. Plea bargaining decisions by prosecutors and the defense have been found to be influenced by both variables however, these two variables alone do not suffice to explain the plea bargaining decisions. Research has shown that plea bargaining participants do, in fact, consider the probability of conviction and the severity of the sentence. In a perfectly rational world, taking the case to trial and plea bargaining would have the same value, and one might expect the participants to be somewhat indifferent between trial and plea bargain. A bargain that would be acceptable to both sides would be close to 5 years. A plea bargain agreement of anything less than 5 years would be a good bargain for the defense, whereas anything over 5 years would be a good bargain for the prosecution. The expected value of going to trial would be 5 years (.5 x 10 years). For example, consider a case in which, based on the evidence, there was a 50% chance that the jury would find the defendant guilty and, if found guilty, the sentence would be 10 years of imprisonment. The desirability of a plea bargain offer is based on its comparison with the expected value of going to trial. According to this model, both sides consider both the probability of conviction at trial and the severity of sentence given a jury finding of guilt multiplying the probability of conviction by the sentence gives one the expected value of going to trial. Decision Theory Approachĭecision theory’s concept of value maximization has been used to explain the plea bargaining decisions made by the prosecution and the defense. In spite of its importance to the criminal justice system, only a limited amount of research exists on the topic of plea bargaining. Additional causes for imperfect bargains involve psychological influences that lead to poor decision making. Critics of plea bargaining have focused on the flaws in the system that distort the process, such as heavy case loads, which cause prosecutors or public defenders to favor plea bargains over trials in almost all circumstances, regardless of the merits of the case. This bargaining process has been viewed by some as a rational one in which the participants take into account both the probability of conviction and the likely sentence if the defendant were to be found guilty at trial the participants arrive at a bargain that is fair to both sides. Contrary to the widespread belief that criminal cases are usually resolved through jury trials, in reality as many as 95% of criminal cases are handled by plea bargaining. By pleading guilty, the defendant gives up the right to go to trial. Plea bargaining is a process in a criminal case whereby the defendant agrees with the prosecutor to plead guilty (or no contest) in exchange for a reduction in charges or a reduction of sentence.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |