Hard Bargaining in Plea Bargaining: When do Prosecutors Cross the Line?

Well over 90 percent of all criminal cases in the United States are resolved by plea bargaining and not by trial. This means that how plea bargaining works impacts nearly every criminal defendant. However, there are few restrictions to protect defendants in the negotiating process. One serious probl...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Alkon, Cynthia (Author)
Format: Electronic Book
Language:English
Published: 2017
In:Year: 2017
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Check availability: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866584952
003 DE-627
005 20250115054916.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231020s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866584952 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866584952 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Alkon, Cynthia  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
109 |a Alkon, Cynthia 
245 1 0 |a Hard Bargaining in Plea Bargaining: When do Prosecutors Cross the Line? 
264 1 |c 2017 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Well over 90 percent of all criminal cases in the United States are resolved by plea bargaining and not by trial. This means that how plea bargaining works impacts nearly every criminal defendant. However, there are few restrictions to protect defendants in the negotiating process. One serious problem is that prosecutors regularly use hard bargaining tactics such as exploding offers, threats to add enhancements, take-it-or-leave-it offers, and threats to seek the death penalty. These hard bargaining tactics contribute to the often highly coercive atmosphere of plea bargaining that can lead innocent defendants to plead guilty. Pressure to plead guilty can also lead defendants to fail to litigate issues, such as search and seizure motions. Finally, the coercive atmosphere in plea bargaining can lead defendants to accept bad deals as they try to avoid potentially much higher sentences after trial. This article argues that the U.S. Supreme Court should limit prosecutorial hard bargaining tactics in plea negotiations to better protect defendants’ right to counsel. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Lafler v. Cooper and Missouri v. Frye, held that there is a constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel in plea bargaining. This article argues that Lafler and Frye demand that the Court restrict prosecutorial hard bargaining behavior that interferes with defense lawyers’ ability to do their jobs and thereby deprives defendants of their constitutional right to counsel. Other areas of law, notably labor law, prohibit hard bargaining. Under the National Labor Relations Act, unions and companies are required to bargain in good faith. Courts have held that some types of hard bargaining act to undermine the representation role of the union and are, therefore, a violation of the duty to bargain in good faith. This article will suggest that one way to argue the Supreme Court should limit prosecutorial hard bargaining is that allowing unrestricted prosecutorial hard bargaining undermines the representation of counsel and thereby prevents effective assistance of counsel in plea bargaining. This article also gives specific examples of what kinds of prosecutorial hard bargaining tactics should be restricted to better protect defendants’ constitutional rights in the plea bargaining process 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/217217261.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4394221544 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866584952 
LOK |0 005 20231020043631 
LOK |0 008 231020||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE18990210 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw