Plea Bargain

Over the years plea bargaining has become the way for the Administration of Justice in America and Canada’s criminal trials. Accused criminals are giving up the rights to a fair trial, to indeed plead guilty, in order to receive a much lesser charge, more comfortable prison, or even to agree to testify against someone else. Fewer than ten percent of criminal cases brought up by the federal government even make it to the federal courts to be tried before juries each year. “According to one legal scholar, every two seconds during a typical workday, a criminal case is disposed of in an American courtroom by way of a guilty plea or nolo contendere plea” (Lynch, par. 1). Which ultimately means more than ninety percent of criminal cases are never tried, and proven to the juries in the court of law? Plea bargaining has shown throughout the years many advantages and disadvantages in the court of law, but is plea bargaining ethical and should it continue to be practiced in criminal cases throughout America and Canada?

First of all, plea bargaining works in criminal cases as what one can call a threat on the defendant. It is a promise by court that if the defendant pleads guilty to the charge, the defendant will be granted with a lesser charge then what may be given if the defendant decides to try the case before a jury. Each side of the case gives up something and gets something back in return (Taylor, par. 5). For example, if a person is convicted for a felony robbery charge, in which requires a minimum sentence of five years in prison, the criminal is given the opportunity under the court of law to comply with the courts. If the criminal decides to comply and plead guilty to the charge, the criminal may be granted only two years in prison. Once the deal is accepted by the court and lawyers, it is then passed on to the courts judgment, in which sentencing and conviction being the most important issues. Plea bargaining is not guaranteed however, the judge may not accept the plea, depending on the agreement. Until accepted by the judge, the plea is not legally binding. If the criminal decides to try the case before a jury, harsher consequences may apply. If the defendant is found guilty, the criminal may face the mandatory sentence for the crime, which could be up to five years in prison.

Plea bargaining in America and Canada’s criminal court cases may pose many advantages for the justice system. First, plea bargaining is legal in both of the countries. America made plea bargaining apart of the justice system in the late 1970’s, through the Supreme Court. America and Canada’s court system are constantly clogged with premature cases making it almost impossible to proceed with a trial by jury for each sentence. “They have always resorted to this plea bargain principle, otherwise their system will be over-clogged and will collapse” (Igbanoi), stated an interviewed Rotimi Jones in the article Plea Bargaining is Lawful. Plea bargaining reduces the strain on the court system, which saves time and money invested into each case.

Reducing the costs of a trial is a major advantage plea bargains entail in America and Canada’s Justice system. “The lack of pleas would also impact revenue” (Emerick). This is a big factor in courtrooms across America and Canada. “The 31,000-plus amended tickets handled by the court in 2005 generated $4.5 million (Emerick).” That was just in tickets alone, that’s undermining the many other court costs amended that year. Plea bargaining is allowing the court systems to reach an agreement on the case quickly, saving plenty of money which comes with the process of court fees. Saving time is another major advantage of plea bargaining. The court process may take several months or even years to try a criminal in the court of law. Plea bargaining cuts this process down and allows the justice system to concentrate much harder on criminal cases much more serious. “If every case that ever can through the court system went to trial, there wouldn’t be enough judges, courtrooms, crown attorneys, police officers, or lawyers to participate in the process” (Taylor, par. 6). This would leave the court system plenty behind and nearly almost impossible to attend to each case. Plea bargaining is essential to court cases and must be done (Emerick), stated attorney Samuel Buccero. “The court is not set up to have multiple trials. The dockets are set up to be done in less than an hour” (Emerick), Buccero said.

Plea bargaining may have advantages in America’s and Canada’s Justice System, but it also proposes an advantage for the accused criminal. It gives the defendant the opportunity to reduce sentence and provide a better, more comfortable stay in correctional facilities. It gives the opportunity for guilty criminals, who know a guilty sentence will be there if facing a jury, to plead guilty to the case for one’s own benefits. Rather than spending time presenting a losing case in front of a judge and jury, and losing plenty of money in court fees, the case can be wrapped up in a matter of agreement. Guilty defendants seem to be in a win-win situation and can use plea bargaining as a total advantage.

While plea bargaining proposes plenty of advantages through the court of law in America and Canada, it shows some disadvantages as well. First off, plea bargaining seems unlawful to many. Every American is entitled to a right to a fair trial by the court of law. Giving the opportunity to plea bargain is taking away from those constitutional rights. Defendants are sucked into the system of taking