In our country, the judicial system, being fair and powerful is still very slow. It has always been very crowded. Since the courts are over crowded, prosecutor’s case-loads are over loaded and defendants wants to save time and money, as the result of which an informal and easy way of pre-trail bargaining came into play. Its is known as Plea-Bargaining. Plea Bargaining is defined as the agreement between the prosecutor and the defendant, whereby the defendant agrees to his or her guilt of crime that has been committed in return for some concession from the prosecutor. This means that the defendant pleads guilty for a less serious charge or to one of the serious charges, in return for the dismissal of other charges or the defendant will plead …show more content…
It has been discussing the provisions which brought plea bargaining. In 1970, the constitutional validity was upheld for the first timein Brady v United States, where it was held not unconstitutuonal to the extend of benefit to an accuded that in turn extends a benefit to state. In order to reduce the delay in disposing criminal matters, the 154th Report of Law Commission for the first time introduced the concept of ‘Plea-Bargaining’as far as our country is concerned, its has got a long history of opposing the introduction of plea bargaining, it was considered illegal, unconstitutional and immoral as far as the criminal trials are concerned, but the legality of this procedure for the first time was realized in the case- State of Gujrat v. Natwar Hachandji …show more content…
The objects and reasons for the introduction of Plea-Bargaining mentions that, “the disposal of criminal trials in court takes considerable time and that in many cases trial does not commence for as long as 3 to 5 years after the accused was remitted to judicial custody, though not recognized by criminal jurisprudence, it is seen as an alternative method to deal with huge arrears of criminal cases”, so the concept was introduced in Indian Criminal judicial system in the year 2005 by the Criminal Law amendment
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
The author looks at the time period that the three were released and discusses the reason for their release, which is Alford plea. In this case, the defendant is voluntarily forced to plead guilty while still proclaiming his or her innocence. The author also looks at the evidence and ends up concluding that that there was little evidence that linked the defendants to the murder. In addition, the author criticizes the state’s government for forcing the men to plead guilty. Using another case, the author looks into this matter by examining the flaws related to the Alford’s plea.
However, a defendant might accept a plea bargain from the prosecution before trial, because the evidence against them is overwhelming. If that is not the case, the prosecution will have to prove their case to a jury beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a crime, and the defendant should have to serve jail or prison time for their punishment as a result of their crime. In conclusion, many people believe the Texas Judicial Branch needs refurbishing for the 21st century.
A plea bargain is an agreement between the prosecutor and the defendant in a criminal case. The prosecutor gives the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to the original charge with less than the maximum sentence. For example, the prosecution and the defense may agree to a misdemeanor charge instead of a felony charge or the parties may agree to a sentence of 12 years instead of 20 years if the recommended sentence for that crime is 10-20 years imprisonment.
A bifurcated trial system was set up which consists of two phases, for bifurcated means divided. It is decided separately if the person on trial is guilty and what the penalty placed on the individual is (Vile). Each phase is subject can be to appeal too. In the first phase or the guilt phase, both sides submit evidence and argue whether or not the individual is guilty or not. In Gregg’s case, he had signed a waiver admitting to the killings and it was evident that he was guilty(“Gregg v. Georgia (1976)”).
In the United States court system, many criminal cases are not resolved in a timely manner. One of the more common ways in which many cases are resolved quickly is through plea bargaining. Plea bargaining is defined as an agreement between defense attorneys and prosecutors. (Spohn & Hemmens, 2012) Alschuler (1979) describes plea bargaining as the self-conviction act of a defendant. Today, approximately ninety percent of defendants plead guilty because of plea bargaining.
Prosecutors have the power to send offenders away which allows them to make harsh decisions. They offer plea bargains to offenders which often will enable them to do time in prison. Pfaff stated that "as long as prosecutors simply use the tough laws as a bargaining chip, not real punishment, legislators can reap the political benefits of looking tough on crime while avoiding difficult financial decisions" (Pfaff, 2017, P136). Prosecutors offer a plea bargain to get rid of cases quickly and not allow offenders to go to trial because they might receive more prison
During those days many people decide to just plead guilty to try and cut their time short. (Pretrial Incarnations) In our near future we need to find a different alternative to bail and pretrial incarnation. When people can’t afford bail, it comes with many setbacks for them including family issues,
Criminal trials are not perfect, but by requiring evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, they can prevent several miscarriages of justice. Considering that innocent individuals may arrive at trial for misidentification, police misconduct or simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time, these individuals are at a disadvantage since by being offered plea deals they avoid trial and avoid the burden of “ beyond a reasonable doubt,” required to be pronounced guilty. Thus, in a CJ system saturated with cases, plea bargains become a mechanism for prosecutors and defense attorneys to bypass trials. For defendants, the fear of incarceration and the unpredictability of juries or judges create the conditions of coercion that might persuade defendants to prefer plea deals over
Lastly, defendants will be able to escape the expensive fees of going to court. Based on the information that was obtained by Marcus Rucker at least thirty percent of cases tend to take the plea. In most cases, there is some evidence, and they would prefer to get a lesser charge and spend less time in jail, then to take a chance. If they do a plea deal, then it would be better for them, and maybe they will get off on some things, that they should be indicted. Marcus Rucker informed me that the ones that are innocent and know that have nothing on them they will go to trial and take that chance because they know that they will be proven innocent.
I do not think that the plea bargain lets someone off easy. While they might receive a lesser change they also are having the fact that they admitted to doing something taken into consideration by the court system when they decide on the punishment. I feel that it equals out in the long run for those who end up taking the plea bargain. In small cases yes the person might get off with just probation, but is probation was something in condensation then the crime could not have been that detrimental. They would not offer something like probation to a deranged murderer if they confessed to killing someone.
This paper is to help show how sometimes judges can be Bias or inherent in the amount of bail set and other restrictions for pre-trial release while showing the concept of bail what can be done to prevent arbitrary and potentially prejudiced decisions from being made in the courtroom when it comes to bail by the judge, Also discuss the pros and cons of private vs. public defense. Introduction This paper will show the pros and cons of pre-release and define pre-trail release and bond, arbitrary. bond types also look into the factors of bail amounts a judge looks at to determine how much the defendant’s bail is and a few ways to prevent arbitrary and potentially Prejudice decisions from being made in the court by judges.
The biggest issue within the Criminal Justice system is the large number of wrongful convictions, innocent people sentenced to die for crimes they did not commit. People are put in prison for years, even executed for false convictions. This affects not only those put in prison but friends and family of the accused. Wrongful convictions aren’t solely a tragedy for those directly involved either. It weakens the faith the public has for the justice system as well as poses safety issues; when innocent people are put away, the real criminals are still out there.
In the said case, the counsel for the appellants tried to argue before the Court of Appeal that the decision in the case Rama Chandran v The Industrial Court of Malaysia & Anor was wrong. Because the court was heard in the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal disagreed. It was also