Plea Bargaining In Criminal Cases

Have you ever got your license revoked, or a speeding ticket? Would you plead out for a misdemeanor charge that may ensure your ability to keep that license and your free life? For some, pleading guilty to a crime you know you didn’t commit, is an overload.

The three basic types of plea bargains: the first one is where the defendant may be allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge; the second is one is, at the request of the prosecutor, a defendant that pleads guilty may receive a lighter sentence than they would if not requested; and thirdly a defendant may plead guilty to one charge in exchange for the prosecutor’s willingness to drop other charges that could be brought. There are three factors that will cause a prosecutor to decide on a plea bargain, they are the seriousness of the offense, the defendant’s criminal history, and how strong of a case the prosecutor has. Plea bargains serve interest to just about everyone that is involved. Plea bargaining serves the interest of all court’s

Most criminal cases end when the defendant (the person accused of a crime) pleads guilty. Guilty pleas are usually favored by everyone involved – each side gets some benefit: A trial isn’t added to the judge’s already-busy court schedule; the prosecution gets a conviction, and the defendant gets some favored treatment, like a sentence that’s less than the one he’d probably get if he went to trial and lost. Pleading guilty comes at a cost, though. A defendant gives up a lot of important rights, like a jury trial and confronting witnesses.

With crucial factors determining the success and/or failures of the death penalty, we certainly take note to the exonerations of convicted persons, especially those who were exonerated after being executed. There are currently 2,147 people who were sentenced to death that have been exonerated, totaling more than 18,750 years lost. It is hard to understand how an innocent person stood so close to being murdered, nevertheless it’s even harder to understand how an innocent person, in fact, was murdered. Cathleen Burnett an associate professor of criminal justice and criminology at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, having seen the death penalty process unfold along with the increasing number of exonerated individuals examined the language

Here is the first problem that needs to be addressed, the Sixth Amendment, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial…” only thing fast are plea bargains, but they are surely not fair. The problem is we need plea bargains, because if not then we be having court cases running 24/7, and one judge would be hearing 100 cases a day. This is why plea bargains account for roughly 90% of all criminal cases. Here are three reasons why plea bargains are supposed to be in

A State without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation. Edmund Burke Perhaps, I would describe the situation with the Criminal Justice Reform in our country with the words of Irish politician Edmund Burke. We have no right to miss the vital "reboot" process of the judicial authorities at this stage. The conception of the law-governed state cannot be achieved until the country has a clear mechanism of protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms that are the key objects when deciding the fate in criminal matters.

On the other hand, when local police departments use the due process model they emphasize on the treatment of the offender rather than punishing the offender. Their primary focus is doing the right thing granting offenders a fair chance. Offenders are offered treatment programs through community based alternatives rather than incarceration. Community based alternatives would grant offenders the opportunities to several different programs such as pretrial release and diversion, probation, restitution, community service, work release programs, and halfway houses. The interest of the due process model with local police departments are to develop long term solutions for offenders rather than immediately punishing an individual whether guilty or

There are many uncivilized leaders and it is hard to choose just one, but barbarism is the opposite of a civil monarchy. In literature, there are many examples of inhuman leaders, including Frank R. Stockton's barbaric king in "The Lady, or the Tiger?". The king is half barbaric and created a legal system that is dishonest and is used for the satisfaction of the viewers. Due to the absence of a government's influence the king’s inhumanity is extremely evident. The king is uncivilized because of his arbitrary and barbaric justice system and his lack of government in his kingdom.

The seventh amendment of the Bill of Rights is about how the people have the right to trial by jury for cases that involve money. This means that if someone wanted to sue another person they would have to go to the jury. For example, in a civil case, where there are two parties and one is trying to sue the other for something the other did. My argument for this amendment is that there are a whole jury to decide and not just one person if the person is being sued or not. My argument against this amendment is that it takes a long time to go through a civil case some civil cases went up to 3 years or more.

In the U.S. criminal justice system, there are two basic sentencing models that the courts use to apply their judgments. These are determinate sentencing and indeterminate sentencing. Determinate sentencing can be referred as a set sentence imposed to an offender this model is based on the famous phrase “Do the crime and will do the time”; however, this model has a unique quality and that is that a parole board can’t overturn the length of the sentence that was imposed. On the other hand indeterminate sentencing can be describe as the length of a sentences that has not being defined yet like the term “25 to life” on this term you can see that the sentencing was not set to an specific time frame, that means that the offenders release date is