Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-25T21:03:32.600Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plea Bargains, Concessions and the Courts: Analysis of a Quasi-experiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2024

Thomas Church Jr.
Thomas Church Jr.*
Affiliation:
Oakland University
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

National debate over the predominance of plea bargaining in the administration of criminal justice in America has become increasingly strident over the past several years. Positions range from the almost unqualified endorsement of plea bargaining practices by no less an authority than the Chief Justice of the United States, through the American Bar Association's (1963) typically moderate proposal for improving procedural safeguards, to the recommendation of total abolition of the practice by the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals (1973). Because of a dearth of hard data concerning the effects of plea bargaining on the criminal justice system, debate over the proposals has tended to produce more heat than light. In the trenchant understatement of one surveyer of the subject, “[s]uch recommendations suffer from insufficient empirical grounding and could benefit from further research on plea bargaining” (Mulkey, 1974: 54).

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , Spring 1976 , pp. 377 - 401
Copyright
Copyright © 1976 The Law and Society Association.

Footnotes

*

An earlier draft of this article was presented at the 1975 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. This research was supported by a grant from the Oakland University Faculty Research Fund. I wish to thank Catherine Jensen for invaluable assistance in collection, coding and analysis of court system records and Malcolm Feeley for extensive and very helpful suggestions for revision.

References

ALSCHULER, Albert (1968) “The Prosecutor's Role in Plea Bargaining,” 36 University of Chicago Law Review 50.Google Scholar
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION PROJECT ON STANDARDS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE (1968) Standards Relating to Pleas of Guilty. Chicago: American Bar Association.Google Scholar
BLUMBERG, Abraham (1966) “The Practice of Law as Confidence Game: Organizational Cooptation of a Profession,” 1 Law & Society Review 15.Google Scholar
BLUMBERG, Abraham (1967) Criminal Justice. Chicago: Quadrangle Books.Google Scholar
CARTER, Lief H. (1974) The Limits of Order. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
CASPER, Jonathan (1972) American Criminal Justice: The Defendant's Perspective. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
COLE, George F. (1970) “The Decision to Prosecute,” 4 Law & Society Review 313.Google Scholar
DEXTER, Louis Anthony (1970) Elite and Specialized Interviewing. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
FEELEY, Malcolm (1973) “Two Models of the Criminal Justice System: An Organizational Perspective,” 9 Law & Society Review 407.Google Scholar
FEELEY, Malcolm (1975) “The Effects of Heavy Caseloads.” Presented at the 1975 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, September 2-5, 1975.Google Scholar
HEUMANN, Milton (1975) “A Note on Plea Bargaining and Case Pressure,” 9 Law & Society Review 515.Google Scholar
KLONOSKI, James, Charles, MITCHELL and Edward, GALLAGHER (1971) “Plea Bargaining in Oregon: A Preliminary Study,” 50 Oregon Law Review 114.Google Scholar
MATHER, Lynn M. (1974) “Some Determinants of the Method of Case Disposition: Decision-Making by Public Defenders in Los Angeles,” 8 Law & Society Review 187.Google Scholar
MULKEY, Michael E. (1974) “The Role of the Prosecution and Defense in Plea Bargaining,” 3 Policy Studies Journal 54.Google Scholar
NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMISSION ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND GOALS (1973) Report of the Task Force on Courts. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
NEWMAN, Donald J. (1956) “Pleading Guilty for Considerations: A Study of Bargain Justice,” 46 Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science 780.Google Scholar
NEWMAN, Donald J. (1966) Conviction: The Determination of Guilt or Innocence without Trial. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
OAKS, Dallin H. and Warren, LEHMAN (1968) A Criminal Justice System and the Indigent. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
PACKER, Herbert L. (1968) The Limits of the Criminal Sanction. Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE (1967) Task Force Report: The Courts. Washington: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
SKOLNICK, Jerome (1966) Justice without Trial. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
SKOLNICK, Jerome (1967) “Social Control in the Adversary System,” 11 Journal of Conflict Resolution 52.Google Scholar
SUDNOW, David (1965) “Normal Crimes: Sociological Features of the Penal Code in a Public Defender's Office,” 12 Social Problems 255.Google Scholar
YALE LAW JOURNAL (1972) “Restructuring the Plea Bargain,” 82 Yale Law Journal 286.Google Scholar