In Defense of "Bargain Justice"

T. Church
{"title":"In Defense of \"Bargain Justice\"","authors":"T. Church","doi":"10.2307/3053266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The strongest critics of plea bargaining argue that the practice should be abolished because it coerces defendants to give up their right to trial and because it results in irrational sentences for criminal defendants. Neither charge is applicable to a system of plea negotiations that meets four basic criteria: (1) the defendant always has the alternative of a jury trial at which both verdict and sentence are determined solely on the merits; (2) the defendant is represented throughout negotiations by competent counsel; (3) both defense and prosecution have equal access to relevant evidence; and (4) both possess sufficient resources to take a case to trial. The most fruitful direction of reform is to seek to achieve these conditions rather than attempt to eliminate plea bargaining.","PeriodicalId":233650,"journal":{"name":"Controversies in Criminal Law","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1979-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Controversies in Criminal Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/3053266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

The strongest critics of plea bargaining argue that the practice should be abolished because it coerces defendants to give up their right to trial and because it results in irrational sentences for criminal defendants. Neither charge is applicable to a system of plea negotiations that meets four basic criteria: (1) the defendant always has the alternative of a jury trial at which both verdict and sentence are determined solely on the merits; (2) the defendant is represented throughout negotiations by competent counsel; (3) both defense and prosecution have equal access to relevant evidence; and (4) both possess sufficient resources to take a case to trial. The most fruitful direction of reform is to seek to achieve these conditions rather than attempt to eliminate plea bargaining.
为“交易公平”辩护
辩诉交易最强烈的批评者认为,这种做法应该被废除,因为它迫使被告放弃接受审判的权利,而且会导致对刑事被告的不合理判决。这两项指控都不适用于符合四个基本标准的认罪谈判制度:(1)被告总是可以选择陪审团审判,在陪审团审判中,判决和量刑都完全取决于案情;(二)被告在整个谈判过程中有称职的律师代表;(三)辩诉双方平等获取有关证据;(四)双方都有足够的资源提起诉讼。最有成效的改革方向是寻求实现这些条件,而不是试图消除辩诉交易。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信