Prosecutors and Plea Bargaining

2021 ◽  
pp. 74-100
Author(s):  
Brian D. Johnson ◽  
Raquel Hernandez
Keyword(s):  
Justice System ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Historical Overview ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Sentencing Reforms

This article reviews the empirical research literature on plea bargaining in the United States. It starts with an historical overview of the evolution of plea bargaining in the criminal justice system. It describes how the rise in plea bargaining has been coupled with an expansion of prosecutorial power. In particular, it elaborates on the role of modern sentencing reforms in enhancing prosecutorial discretion in plea negotiations. Next, it examines normative perspectives and philosophical arguments regarding the utility of plea bargaining. This includes discussion of how plea bargaining may circumvent the goals of criminal punishment. Lastly, it reviews the empirical state of the research literature on plea bargaining and offers future directions for expanding this work. It concludes with policy recommendations aimed at addressing continuing issues and concerns in the guilty plea process.

Prosecuting Misdemeanors

2021 ◽  
pp. 512-538
Author(s):  
Jenny Roberts
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Discretionary Power ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Exercise Of Discretion

Although violent crime gets the most media, public, and legislative attention in the United States, misdemeanors make up approximately 75 percent of all criminal court cases, with more than 13 million new misdemeanor cases filed each year. This chapter discusses the role of prosecutors in the misdemeanor system. First, it addresses prosecutorial discretion and mass misdemeanor criminalization. Prosecutors, with near-unfettered discretionary power, are characterized as the most powerful actors in criminal cases. Yet often, prosecutors fail to properly exercise their discretion in low-level cases or are completely absent from the charging and sometimes even the adjudicatory processes. This is particularly problematic in misdemeanor cases, where informed prosecutorial decision-making is critical given the enormous volume of arrests and structural and institutional realities that weaken the role of other lower court actors. Proper exercise of discretion is also critical given well-documented racial disparities in the misdemeanor realm and the need to mitigate the myriad disproportionate effects of the ever-growing number of collateral consequences that flow from even a minor criminal record. Second, the chapter examines the misdemeanor prosecutor’s role at key stages: charging, bail, plea bargaining, sentencing, expungement, and post-conviction innocence claims. The chapter draws on examples of prosecutorial practice as well as theoretical and empirical research about prosecutorial discretion. Some recently elected so-called progressive prosecutors have already implemented significant promised changes. Although implementation of such reforms is nascent, time will tell whether a newly attentive electorate and a fresh prosecutorial approach will begin to roll back the extreme overuse and disproportionate impact of misdemeanor prosecutions in the United States.

Criminal Justice in an Era of Mass Deportation

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ingrid V. Eagly
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
State Level ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Collateral Consequence

After a sustained period of hypercriminalization, the United States criminal justice system is undergoing reform. Congress has reduced federal sentencing for drug crimes, prison growth is slowing, and some states are even closing prisons. Low-level crimes have been removed from criminal law books, and attention is beginning to focus on long-neglected issues such as bail and criminal court fines. Still largely overlooked in this era of ambitious reform, however, is the treatment of immigrants in the criminal justice system. An unprecedented focus on immigration enforcement targeted at “felons, not families” has resulted in a separate system of punitive treatment reserved for noncitizens, which includes crimes of migration, longer periods of pretrial detention, harsher criminal sentences, and the almost certain collateral consequence of lifetime banishment from the United States. For examples of state-level solutions to this predicament, this Essay turns to a trio of bold criminal justice reforms from California that (1) require prosecutors to consider immigration penalties in plea bargaining; (2) change the state definition of “misdemeanor” from a maximum sentence of a year to 364 days; and (3) instruct law enforcement agencies to not hold immigrants for deportation purposes unless they are first convicted of serious crimes. Together, these new laws provide an important window into how state criminal justice systems could begin to address some of the unique concerns of noncitizen criminal defendants.

scholarly journals Leprosy and the Plague: State Surveillance of Low-Income Fathers

2013 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 124-139
Author(s):  
Monika Jean Ulrich Myers ◽  
Michael Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Social Control ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Child Support ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Benefits ◽  
Child Support Enforcement ◽  
The Social ◽  
State Surveillance

Foucault’s theory of state social control contrasts societal responses to leprosy, where deviants are exiled from society but promised freedom from social demands, and the plague, where deviants are controlled and surveyed within society but receive some state assistance in exchange for their cooperation.In this paper, I analyze how low-income fathers in the United States simultaneously experience social control consistent with leprosy and social control consistent with the plague but do not receive the social benefits that Foucault associates with either status.Through interviews with 57 low-income fathers, I investigate the role of state surveillance in their family lives through child support enforcement, the criminal justice system, and child protective services.Because they did not receive any benefits from compliance with this surveillance, they resisted it, primarily by dropping “off the radar.”Men justified their resistance in four ways: they had their own material needs, they did not want the child, they did not want to separate from their child’s mother or compliance was unnecessary.This resistance is consistent with Foucault’s distinction between leprosy and the plague.They believed that they did not receive the social benefits accorded to plague victims, so they attempted to be treated like lepers, excluded from social benefits but with no social demands or surveillance.

Comparing Plea Bargaining and Abbreviated Trial Procedures

2019 ◽  
pp. 702-727
Author(s):  
Gwladys Gilliéron
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
The United States ◽  
Wrongful Convictions ◽  
The U.S

This chapter compares U.S. plea bargaining with plea-bargaining-type procedures and penal orders in Continental Europe, with reference to Switzerland, Germany, and France. It first considers consensual criminal procedures across jurisdictions and why they exist, focusing on plea bargaining in the U.S. criminal justice system and abbreviated trial procedures in European civil law systems. It then examines the extent to which abbreviated trial procedures in civil law systems differ from plea bargaining in the U.S. system, the problems inherent in consensual criminal procedures, and the question of whether there are any solutions. In particular, it explains how plea bargaining and penal orders may lead to wrongful convictions. Finally, it discusses prospects for reform of plea bargaining in the United States and in civil law systems in Europe.

The Rise, Fall, and Afterlife of the Death Penalty in the United States

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 299-315
Author(s):  
Carol S. Steiker ◽  
Jordan M. Steiker
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The United States ◽  
History Of ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
History Of Race ◽  
Western Democracies

This review addresses four key issues in the modern (post-1976) era of capital punishment in the United States. First, why has the United States retained the death penalty when all its peer countries (all other developed Western democracies) have abolished it? Second, how should we understand the role of race in shaping the distinctive path of capital punishment in the United States, given our country's history of race-based slavery and slavery's intractable legacy of discrimination? Third, what is the significance of the sudden and profound withering of the practice of capital punishment in the past two decades? And, finally, what would abolition of the death penalty in the United States (should it ever occur) mean for the larger criminal justice system?

Mosques in the United States

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ihsan Bagby
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civic Engagement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nation Of Islam ◽  
Historical Overview ◽  
Muslim Community ◽  
Community Centers ◽  
American Muslim ◽  
The 1960S

In the Muslim world, mosques function as places of worship rather than “congregations” or community centers. Muslims pray in any mosque that is convenient, since they are not considered members of a particular mosque but of the ummah (global community of Muslims). In America, however, Muslims attached to specific mosques have always followed congregational patterns. They transform mosques into community centers aimed at serving the needs of Muslims and use them as the primary vehicle for the collective expression of Islam in the American Muslim community. This chapter provides a historical overview of mosques in America. It also looks at the conversion of African Americans into mainstream Islam starting in the 1960s, the transformation of the Nation of Islam into a mainstream Muslim group, and the growth of mosques in America. In addition, it describes mosque participants, mosque activities, mosque structures, and mosque finances as well as the American mosque’s embrace of civic engagement and the role of women in the American mosque. Finally, the chapter examines the mosque leaders’ approach to Islam.

scholarly journals Criminal Justice after 9-11: ICC or Military Tribunals

2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 545-568
Author(s):  
Thomas Mertens
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Thought Experiment ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Perceived Threat ◽  
Clash Of Civilizations

Nowadays, widespread consensus exists that the dramatic events of September 11, 2001 changed not only the country that suffered these attacks but also the way many in the West view the world outside this exclusive circle. For quite a number, it confirmed Huntington's thesis of a clash of civilizations – a vision of a future of ‘us’ versus ‘them'. But as the attackers were being identified, it became clear that in a sense they came from among us; although technically foreign nationals all, they lived and studied inconspicuously in western, multicultural societies. How are we then to deal with this enemy within? How is democracy to fight this so-called War on Terror and survive? Such questions are obviously not new. Bearing De Tocqueville's assertion in mind that a long war is not needed in order to put freedom at risk in a democratic society, this article, using the technique of a thought experiment, seeks to examine the increased prerogatives that governments – fearing the enemy within – have granted themselves in the realm of criminal law to deal with the perceived threat. This experiment will bring the reader, in a non-specialist way, from the criminal justice system of Germany to the possible role of an operational International Criminal Court, and from the criminal justice system of the United States to military tribunals as a means of dealing with what those in power claim is an extraordinary threat.

Victims and Prosecutors

2021 ◽  
pp. 372-398
Author(s):  
Amanda Konradi ◽  
Tirza Jo Ochrach-Konradi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Prosecutorial Discretion ◽  
Trial Courts ◽  
Victim Satisfaction ◽  
Victim Impact Statements ◽  
Therapeutic Justice

This chapter explores crime victims’ experiences in U.S. trial courts in relation to the passage, application, and adjudication of state and federal victims’ rights legislation (VRL). It reviews victims’ current rights established through legislation and case law: to privacy, information, and notification; to be present; and to be heard in pre-trial hearings, in trials, in plea bargaining, and in victim impact statements. It reviews qualitative research documenting how and why prosecutorial discretion is often exercised to limit victims’ participation in trials and pleas, highlighting incentives for emotion management. It also reviews proposals, which are counter to this standard, designed to achieve greater victim participation and to produce higher quality testimony, including extensive pre-court preparation and courtroom intermediaries. It assesses the efficacy of practices to protect victims from secondary victimization in court, including shielding (close circuit video and screens) and support dogs. It explores use of private attorneys to (1) ensure that prosecutors and judges comply with VRL and (2) pursue victim-directed, private prosecution of sexual assault in the United States and elsewhere. It concludes that the promise of VRL—to provide therapeutic justice outcomes, achieve victim satisfaction, and enact procedural justice—is yet to be realized in the United States; however, an evidence-based approach toward prosecutorial practice would be advantageous for victims.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document