Before you will read the law paper sample from our professional legal writers, let us mention that law and legal papers are very hard to write. So our advice to you is to ask for help from our law and legal papers writing service. Our professionals will write your paper on any deadline and at fair prices. Put the requirements of your law research paper into order form or contact our customer support service through online chat on E-Mail.
Plea bargaining is an agreement in a criminal case between the defender and the persecutor whereby the prosecutor is in a position to determine the utilization of his resources. During the agreement time, the defendant agrees to present his or her arguments at trial; hence, the prosecutor may leave some of the charges in return.
In federal court, plea bargaining takes place before the trial unless a delay emerges. The judge does not take part in plea bargaining discussions; therefore, the prosecutors tend to get involved in offering a plea bargain. The prosecutor and the defendant have a chance to avoid risk convictions in the trials depending on the charges offered during the court (Kober, 2011).
The positive impact of plea bargaining is that it brings a lot of benefits to both prosecutor and the defender. Also, the prosecutors accept plea bargains because they systematically move in monitoring the rates of conviction, which leads to the defendant's plea agreement.
Plea bargaining is used in criminal justice as a shortcut to justice. Agreements in this case tend to result in some troubles because they have minimal gain out of victory in all the involvements. Prosecutors take an oath to offer the admitted criminals sentences, which differ from those authorized by law; hence, most of the criminals are extremely difficult in admitting their criminal behavior without the benefit of the trial. Critical evaluation of plea bargaining is that the process is too unfair, which results in minimal outcomes.
The defendants, in this case, gain a lot of charges, whereby the prosecutors have many ideas of selecting discretion rates of conviction from the defendant side. The prosecutor is forced to win all the costs, which usually appear to be lots of money, ordering large conviction rates to coerce the guilty and deprive the procedural safeguards and the full investigations of the whole trial process. This practice of overcharging may force a defender to leave the court because of the high amount of charges incurred, which may turn to be reluctant in preventing the prosecution from being accused.
Plea bargaining allows the court to utilize the resources in a good way if the case is fulfilled in a good and orderly manner. Prosecutors have a great chance of winning because of the defendants who may be proved guilty of their cases by the judges. In some courts, plea bargaining handles the cases between the prosecutor and the defendants as contracts because the prosecutors may be in a position of their deals most of the time.
Losses on Part of Defendants
Discretion in plea bargaining is practiced by the prosecutors where they may withdraw the offer. A defendant in this area is free from rejection as far as a plea bargain is concerned. In a case where plea bargaining is withdrawn, the defender acquires a high chance of being found guilty and receives more severe punishment than the one offered by the prosecution in the plea bargain (Kober, 2011). Prosecutors defeat defendants because they miss a chance of negotiation incurring the risk of conviction. In this case, they may develop a discussion between the prosecutor and the defendant because of the possible outcomes.
Most of the people with constructional rights tend to follow the channels of right procedure in their claims as far as the offenders are concerned. The prosecutors may not be in a position to offer a free bargain to the offenders because they may deliver the deals to them in different ways. For example, a prosecutor may not deliver a plea bargain to a person accused of immoral behaviors like in the case of murder simply because the act is widely considered as a punishment in the court.
When a court agrees to a plea agreement, the guilty plea operates as a conviction; therefore, the defendant is free from the same offense. In a case where the government breaches a plea bargain agreement, the defendant tends to find out the way of withdrawing the guilty plea, thus, asking the court to enforce the agreement (Kober, 2011). In this scenario, the government breaches a plea agreement when it bounces to offer the necessary plea agreement.
Then, the Brady evidence gets involved to some extent while a prosecutor rejects a plea agreement. It causes a subsequent trial since the statements made during the bargaining time are not proved against the defendant. Eliminating plea bargains would be prohibitively expensive and would defiantly collapse.
Also, some of the commenters of plea bargaining have a lot of problems in countries like the USA where it is a primary matter to define what it actually entails. The offenders can take a shorter time sentence and a reduction charged offense. Benefits consist in the fact that they do not face publicly aired trial because they focus on the legal literature, which has been on the defendant's right to trial guaranteed in the Sixth Amendment, Harvard Law Review in American Constitution.
Plea Bargaining Reform
Langer (2006) suggests that the practice of plea bargaining revolves around the globe in return for administrative efficiency in the Supreme Court. The plea bargaining reform in the court also allows the prosecution to give a chance for plea bargaining with its charging power. Plea bargaining is not an absolute act where the expectations are based on legal and factual grounds. It involves the increase of restrictions on sentencing uniformity in federal sentencing guidelines of the court.
The current ideas in criminal justice should be focused on the modifications of the way it is practiced. Such concepts suggest a strong issue of control over the abuse and develop additional truth of the findings to safeguard the innocent defendants. This is done owing to the limitation of safeguards; for example, evaluating the nature of the offense and taking the criminal history of the defendant. Prosecutors should be allowed to bargain on the facts of the procedural issues and modalities of the sentence recommendations, but they should not charge the bargain when dealing with a criminal case (Langer, 2006).
Plea bargaining can be reformed if the defendants waive the same procedural rights and trials which do not take place. In plea bargaining, the defender and the prosecutor agree to bring the rate charges, which they may have incurred during the process. In this case, the defendant is proved guilty (Langer, 2006). The judge generally asks questions about the defendant to ensure that the agreement is made in good condition without any compromise.
From the defendant's point of view, plea bargaining begins when a person who is acting as a defense in court meets the offender first. A plea bargaining has an aspect of explicit chances and an extra sentence for the defenders who have a right to trials. Also, policy laws support plea bargaining, applied to those who committed serious and tough crimes.