Plea Deals as Alternative Dispute Resolution
In the Missouri Vs. Frye case of 2012, Justice Anthony Kennedy states that “Criminal justice today is, for the most part, a system of pleas, not a system of trials.” (Viano, 2012). The sentiments by the Supreme Court justice signify the extent to which plea bargains influence the American justice system. Plea deals are a form of alternative dispute resolution that has become quite common in the criminal justice system. While America prides itself as a beacon of democracy for its adherence to the rule of law, the exponential growth of a culture of plea bargains paints a different picture (Dervan & Edkins, 2013). The prevalence of plea deals as an alternative dispute resolution technique has resulted in the conviction of numerous innocent victims. Therefore, to gauge the real effect of plea deals on the justice system, their benefits and shortcomings must be analyzed.
Plea deals have become a defining feature of the federal criminal justice system in the United States. Berdejo (2018) defines plea deals as agreements between prosecutors and defendants, whereby suspects agree to plead guilty to a crime before going to trial in exchange for a concession on their sentence. The use of plea bargains has become the go-to formula for most prosecutors in the US. Viano (2012) states that research data shows that plea bargains resolve approximately 97% of all criminal cases in US District Courts. This data confirms the prevalence of the use of plea bargains by prosecutors to attain convictions. While some plea bargains result in the conviction of guilty perpetrators, most have resulted in the conviction or wrong sentencing of innocent victims. Berdejo (2018) observes that most of the wrongful convictions resulting from plea deals have involved black perpetrators. He attributes this bias to the fact that black suspects are skeptical of a fair trial and may lack funds to hire lawyers. Therefore they end up taking plea deals to get shorter sentences.
There are several benefits that a person charged with a criminal offense may reap from taking a plea bargain as compared to going to trial. First, plea bargains always result in suspects getting a lower sentence for the crimes they are charged with. Dervan & Edkins (2013) note that in a plea deal, defendants never get the maximum sentence related to the crime in question. Therefore, suspects are much better off taking plea deals than risking going to trial where they may be convicted for longer sentences. Another benefit to plea bargains is that they are less costly as compared to going to trial. Viano (2012) contends that the affordability of a plea deal is considered the number one reason for most black suspects taking guilty pleas. Most African American perpetrators are unable to raise lawyer fees and subsequently end up taking guilty pleas as they are cheaper than going to trial.
The high prevalence of plea deals in current criminal cases is due to the fast resolution of cases. By taking a guilty plea, perpetrators get the benefit of getting their cases over with quickly instead of going to trials, which may drag on for more extended periods (Dervan & Edkins, 2013). They continue to state that innocent people who are backed into a corner by prosecutors with no apparent way out opt for plea bargains instead of going to trial. Research data also shows that perpetrators, whether guilty or innocent, take plea deals as they remove the uncertainty of sentencing (Berdejo, 2018). It is considered better to take a plea bargain that offers a minimum sentence duration than gamble going to trial and get a longer sentence. Therefore, plea bargains provide the benefit of certainty for the suspects.
Plea bargains also come with adverse effects, especially to innocent victims charged with criminal cases. To begin with, taking a guilty plea means getting a criminal record as well as getting incarcerated. Although the sentence given may be relatively less than in a trial, the suspect still gets a criminal record that negatively affects them when released. Berdejo (2018) notes that this disadvantage is one suffered by most ex-con African Americans. While an individual may be innocent of the crime charged, they get to live the rest of their lives with a criminal record that impacts their ability to get a good job or other prospects later in life. Taking a guilty plea in exchange for a shorter sentence also robs suspects with a chance to exonerate themselves in a fair trial. According to Dervan & Edkins (2013), this is a choice most young black males have to make owing to the nature of trials that are heavily skewed and their financial constraints. Therefore, they end up taking plea bargains at the expense of their credibility. Consequently, it is evident that plea deals are an impediment to individuals, whether innocent or guilty, getting a fair trial.