skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 66769 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: PLEA-BARGAINING, CRIME CONTROL, AND DUE PROCESS - A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS (FROM PLEA-BARGAINING, 1980, BY WILLIAM F MCDONALD AND JAMES A CRAMER - SEE NCJ-66765)
Author(s): W M RHODES
Corporate Author: Lexington Books
United States of America
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 24
Sponsoring Agency: Lexington Books
New York, NY 10022
US Dept of Justice
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 74-NI-99-0008; 75-NI-00-0111; 76-NI-99-0118; 77-NI-99-0060
Format: Document
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: QUANTITATIVE ESTIMATES ARE DRAWN FROM A STUDY OF THE WASHINGTON, D.C., SUPERIOR COURT WITH REGARD TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH CONCERNS FOR CRIME CONTROL CONFLICT WITH OTHER SOCIAL VALUES, ESPECIALLY IN PLEA BARGAINING.
Abstract: 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)
Index Term(s): Crime control model; Dispositions; District of Columbia; Due process model; Plea negotiations; Pleas; Robbery; Sentencing/Sanctions
Note: REPRINTED FROM 'PLEA-BARGAINING - WHO GAINS? WHO LOSES?' INSTITUTE FOR LAW AND SOCIAL RESEARCH
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=66769

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.