THE ANALYSIS CONSIDERED THE TENSIONS BETWEEN THE CRIME CONTROL AND DUE PROCESS MODELS FOR ASSURING CRIMINAL JUSTICE, AND THE WAYS IN WHICH PLEA NEGOTIATION IMPROVES OR IMPEDES THE PROCESS. IT ASSUMED (1) THAT THROUGH EXAMINATION OF CASES OF DEFENDANTS WHO WENT TO TRIAL, INFERENCES CAN BE DRAWN ABOUT HYPOTHETICAL TRIALS FOR DEFENDANTS WHO ENTERED GUILTY PLEAS AND FOR DEFENDANT WHO HAD THEIR CASES DISMISSED, AND (2) THAT OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS OF THE THEORETICAL CONCEPTS OF FACTUAL GUILT AND LEGAL GUILT CAN BE IDENTIFIED. QUANTITATIVE ESTIMATES SUGGESTED THAT FRICTION BETWEEN DUE PROCESS AND CRIME CONTROL ADVOCATES CAN BE REDUCED BUT NOT RECONCILED. AS LONG AS GUILTY PLEAS ARE ACCEPTED, WITH OR WITHOUT SENTENCE CONCESSIONS, PERSONS WHO PLEAD GUILTY WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE HAD A CHANCE OF BEING ACQUITTED AT TRIAL. GIVEN THE COST OF TRIALS AND DESPITE DUE PROCESS CONCERNS, GUILTY PLEAS WILL REMAIN THE DOMINANT FORM OF DISPOSITION OF CASES RESULTING IN CONVICTION. FURTHERMORE, THE FORM OF PLEABARGAINING WILL BE DETERMINED BY COMPROMISE AMONG CRIME CONTROL, DUE PROCESS, AND ECONOMIC CONCERNS. PLEABARGAINING AS PRACTICED IN D.C.'S SUPERIOR COURT WAS SHOWN TO REDUCE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. WHEN SENTENCING CONCESSIONS WERE EXCHANGED FOR GUILTY PLEAS, THE DIRECT EFFECT WAS TO INCREASE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY, LARGELY BECAUSE OF THE INCAPACITATIVE EFFECT OF IMPRISONMENT. HOWEVER, WHEN SENTENCE CONCESSIONS WERE AWARDED IN ROBBERY CASES, THE INDIRECT ABILITY OF THE GUILTY PLEA PROCESS TO INCREASE PROSECUTIONS AND CONVICTIONS WAS JUDGED TO OFFSET INCREASED CRIME RESULTING FROM SENTENCE CONCESSIONS. OVERALL, ENHANCED EVIDENCE-GATHERING AND IMPROVED WITNESS COOPERATION WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH BOTH CRIME CONTROL AND DUE PROCESS CONCERNS. NOTES AND DIAGRAMS ARE INCLUDED. (MHP)