For many years, in one form or another, the criminal justice system has existed. The criminal justice system is the system that enforces rules and regulates the safest structure for society. There are many levels to enforcing justice and one crucial part of the criminal justice system is plea bargaining. According to Jus 505 lecture (2011), a plea bargain is when a defendant pleads guilty to their offence to receive a less harsh punishment. There has been much controversy over this procedure due to its ethical and legal implications. In a very controversial case, Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Ruiz, 536 U.S. 622 (2002), it was expressed that to receive a plea agreement, the defendant waives the right to know all evidence against him. This
…show more content…
Defendant should know all terms of the plea agreement so that they are able to have the fair option. Personally the ruling that withholding information in this case was constitutional disgusts me. The justice system is a system to enforce fairness and respect. I understand that this was a fast track agreement however the defendant deserved fairness and an equal opportunity. The plea bargaining process generally includes the prosecutor, defense and the defense attorney. Where this process is a very important part of the criminal justice system it comes with its advantages as well as its disadvantages.
The advantages and disadvantages of plea bargains fall on both the prosecutor side as well as the defense. They can either gain from a plea barging or lose. On the prosecutors side there are a lot of advantages that can be seen as well disadvantages. One advantage of plea bargaining is the fact that it is cost efficient. When you look at a lot of cost involved in the criminal justice system, having plea …show more content…
In some cases the defendant seems to be getting the better deal by by-passing trail and taking a lesser sentence on a lesser charge, however that might not always be the case. In many cases the defendant can take a plea barging and be railroaded. As seen in the case of Santabello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 261 (1971) prosecution is not always entitled to share all the implications of a case nor hold strong to a previous agreement and do not have to always commit verbatim to what was agreed. In some instances it seems that the prosecutor leaves it up to the discretion of the defense attorney to let their client know all the avenue options and the pros and cons in taking what ever avenue they chose. As decided by the Supreme Court a defendant does not have to be provided “exculpatory information” when offered a plea (Grand Canyon University, 2014). As proven, it is a big disadvantage to the defense because it is not unconstitutional to not present all the information on the plea barging. In a odd double standard way, with not being presented with all the information, someone who could have possible gotten off can serve time and possibly be reformed to not recommitting
Defendant should know all terms of the plea agreement so that they are able to have the fair option. Personally the ruling that withholding information in this case was constitutional disgusts me. The justice system is a system to enforce fairness and respect. I understand that this was a fast track agreement however the defendant deserved fairness and an equal opportunity. The plea bargaining process generally includes the prosecutor, defense and the defense attorney. Where this process is a very important part of the criminal justice system it comes with its advantages as well as its disadvantages.
The advantages and disadvantages of plea bargains fall on both the prosecutor side as well as the defense. They can either gain from a plea barging or lose. On the prosecutors side there are a lot of advantages that can be seen as well disadvantages. One advantage of plea bargaining is the fact that it is cost efficient. When you look at a lot of cost involved in the criminal justice system, having plea …show more content…
In some cases the defendant seems to be getting the better deal by by-passing trail and taking a lesser sentence on a lesser charge, however that might not always be the case. In many cases the defendant can take a plea barging and be railroaded. As seen in the case of Santabello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 261 (1971) prosecution is not always entitled to share all the implications of a case nor hold strong to a previous agreement and do not have to always commit verbatim to what was agreed. In some instances it seems that the prosecutor leaves it up to the discretion of the defense attorney to let their client know all the avenue options and the pros and cons in taking what ever avenue they chose. As decided by the Supreme Court a defendant does not have to be provided “exculpatory information” when offered a plea (Grand Canyon University, 2014). As proven, it is a big disadvantage to the defense because it is not unconstitutional to not present all the information on the plea barging. In a odd double standard way, with not being presented with all the information, someone who could have possible gotten off can serve time and possibly be reformed to not recommitting