Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 25, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:14 pm
Time: 9:14 pm
Results for guilty pleas
11 results foundAuthor: Dervan, Lucian E. Title: The Innocent Defendant's Dilemma: An Innovative Empirical Study of Plea Bargaining's Innocence Problem Summary: In 1989, Ada JoAnn Taylor was accused of murder and presented with stark options. If she pleaded guilty, she would be rewarded with a sentence of ten to forty years in prison. If, however, she proceeded to trial and was convicted, she would likely spend the rest of her life behind bars. Over a thousand miles away in Florida and more than twenty years later, a college student was accused of cheating and presented with her own incentives to admit wrongdoing and save the university the time and expense of proceeding before a disciplinary review board. Both women decided the incentives were enticing and pleaded guilty. That Taylor and the college student both pleaded guilty is not the only similarity between the cases. Both were also innocent of the offenses for which they had been accused. After serving nineteen years in prison, Taylor was exonerated after DNA testing proved that neither she nor any of the other five defendants who pleaded guilty in her case were involved in the murder. As for the college student, her innocence is assured by the fact that, unbeknownst to her, she was actually part of an innovative new study into plea bargaining and innocence. The study, conducted by the authors, involving dozens of college students, and taking place over several months, not only recreated the innocent defendant’s dilemma experienced by Taylor, but revealed that plea bargaining’s innocence problem is not isolated to an obscure and rare set of cases. Strikingly, the authors’ study found that over half of the participants were willing to falsely admit guilt in return for a perceived benefit. This finding not only brings finality to the long-standing debate regarding the possible extent of plea bargaining’s innocence problem, but also ignites a fundamental constitutional question regarding an institution the Supreme Court reluctantly approved of in 1970 in return for an assurance it would not be used to induce innocent defendants to falsely admit guilt. Details: Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, 2012. 52p. Source: Working Paper: Internet Resource: Accessed June 19, 2012 at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2071397 Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2071397 Shelf Number: 125362 Keywords: Guilty PleasInnocencePlea Bargaining |
Author: New South Wales Law Reform Commission Title: Encouraging Appropriate Early Guilty Pleas: Models for Discussion Summary: This models paper presents approaches that other jurisdictions have taken to encourage early guilty pleas. The purpose of this paper is to stimulate discussion on what models (or combination of models) might or should be taken up and adapted to the NSW criminal justice system. The introduction to the paper provides background on the models paper. We highlight the obstacles that any reform would need to overcome and summarise the approaches or "models" of cognate jurisdictions that are detailed in the following chapters. Details: Sydney: NSW Law Reform Commission, 2013. 168p. Source: Internet Resource: Consultation Paper 15: Accessed August 6, 2014 at: http://www.lawreform.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/lrc/m731654l13/cp15_2.pdf Year: 2013 Country: Australia URL: http://www.lawreform.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/lrc/m731654l13/cp15_2.pdf Shelf Number: 132901 Keywords: Criminal Courts (Australia)Guilty PleasPlea Bargaining |
Author: Ringland, Clare Title: Predictors of guilty pleas in the NSW District Court Summary: Aim: To examine factors associated with early, late, and not guilty pleas in the District Court of NSW. Method: Data relating to NSW District Court matters between 2011 and 2013 were extracted from the Re-offending Database. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between demographic details, the number and type of offences, and previous experience with the criminal justice system, and whether a plea of not guilty or guilty was entered, and whether guilty pleas were entered 'early' or 'late'. Results: Overall, 55 per cent of defendants entered an early guilty plea, 28 per cent a late guilty plea and 17 per cent pleaded not guilty. A range of factors were associated with a defendant's plea. For example, with increasing age, defendants were more likely to plead not guilty, and those who did plead guilty were more likely to plead guilty late rather than early. In terms of offence type/s, defendants charged with aggravated sexual assault and serious assault resulting in injury were more likely to plead not guilty, and those who did plead guilty were more likely to plead guilty late rather than early. Defendants charged with robbery, break and enter, and illicit drug offences were more likely to plead guilty, and were more likely to plead guilty early. With increased time between the alleged offence and the committal date, defendants were more likely to plead not guilty and when a guilty plea was entered it was more likely to be entered late than early. While defendants with a prior conviction were more likely than those without a prior conviction to plead guilty than not guilty, they were more likely to enter a guilty plea late. Similarly, compared to those with no concurrent offences, those charged with more than one offence were more likely to plead guilty, and more likely to plead guilty late than early. Conclusion: Having a prior conviction and being charged with more than one offence were factors associated with an increased likelihood of a late guilty plea and a decreased likelihood of a not guilty plea. Targeting cases with these characteristics may help to increase the rate of early guilty pleas. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2014. 8p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Paper no. 96: Accessed September 23, 2014 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l4/bb96.pdf Year: 2014 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/_assets/bocsar/m716854l4/bb96.pdf Shelf Number: 133396 Keywords: Criminal Courts (Australia) Guilty PleasPlea Bargaining |
Author: Victoria (Australia). Sentencing Advisory Council Title: Guilty pleas in the higher courts: rates, timing, and discounts Summary: This report examines the rate and timing of guilty pleas, and their effect on sentence, in the Supreme Court of Victoria and the County Court of Victoria ('the higher courts') from July 2009 to June 2014. The study includes a total of 9,618 cases and 35,902 charges sentenced in the higher courts during the reference period (2009-10 to 2013-14). Since 2008, section 6AAA of the Victorian Sentencing Act 1991 has required sentencing judges (in certain circumstances) to state the sentence that they would have imposed if the offender had not pleaded guilty. Subtracting the actual sentence from this notional undiscounted sentence reveals the stated reduction in sentence, or 'discount' for the guilty plea. As well as making the discounts more transparent to the parties in the case, the very high compliance with section 6AAA in the higher courts has enabled extensive data collection on plea-based sentence discounts for the first time in Victoria. During the reference period (2009-10 to 2013-14), there were over 7,000 higher court cases with sufficient detail in the 6AAA statement to analyse the reductions awarded for guilty pleas. A unique feature of these data is that the information about the plea-based reduction is sourced directly from the sentencing judges. Details: Melbourne: Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council, 2015. 106p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 13, 2015 at: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Guilty%20Pleas%20in%20the%20Higher%20Courts_2.pdf Year: 2015 Country: Australia URL: https://www.sentencingcouncil.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/Guilty%20Pleas%20in%20the%20Higher%20Courts_2.pdf Shelf Number: 136387 Keywords: Criminal CourtsGuilty PleasJudgesPlea BargainingSentencing |
Author: Heaton, Paul Title: The Downstream Consequences of Misdemeanor Pretrial Detention Summary: In misdemeanor cases, pretrial detention poses a particular problem because it may induce otherwise innocent defendants to plead guilty in order to exit jail, potentially creating widespread error in case adjudication. While practitioners have long recognized this possibility, empirical evidence on the downstream impacts of pretrial detention on misdemeanor defendants and their cases remains limited. This Article uses detailed data on hundreds of thousands of misdemeanor cases resolved in Harris County, Texas - the third largest county in the U.S. - to measure the effects of pretrial detention on case outcomes and future crime. We find that detained defendants are 25% more likely than similarly situated releases to plead guilty, 43% more likely to be sentenced to jail, and receive jail sentences that are more than twice as long on average. Furthermore, those detained pretrial are more likely to commit future crime, suggesting that detention may have a criminogenic effect. These differences persist even after fully controlling for the initial bail amount as well as detailed offense, demographic, and criminal history characteristics. Use of more limited sets of controls, as in prior research, overstates the adverse impacts of detention. A quasi-experimental analysis based upon case timing confirms that these differences likely reflect the casual effect of detention. These results raise important constitutional questions, and suggest that Harris County could save millions of dollars a year, increase public safety, and reduce wrongful convictions with better pretrial release policy. Details: Philadelphia: Quattrone Center for the Fair Administration of Justice, 2016. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 22, 2016 at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2809840 Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2809840 Shelf Number: 139791 Keywords: BailGuilty PleasPretrial DetentionRecidivismWrongful Convictions |
Author: Leslie, Emily Title: The Unintended Impact of Pretrial Detention on Case Outcomes: Evidence from NYC Arraignments Summary: In the United States, over 400,000 individuals are in jail each day waiting for their criminal cases to be resolved. The majority of these individuals are detained pretrial due to the inability to post low levels of bail (less than $3,000). We estimate the impact of being detained pretrial on the likelihood of an individual being convicted or pleading guilty, and their sentence length, using data on nearly a million misdemeanor and felony cases in New York City from 2009 to 2013. Causal e↵ects are identified using variation across arraignment judges in their propensities to detain defendants. We find that being detained increases the probability of conviction by over seven percentage points by causing individuals to plead guilty more often. Because pretrial detention is driven by failure to post bail, these adverse effect disproportionately hurt low-income individuals. Details: Chicago: University of Chicago, 2016. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 19, 2017 at: http://home.uchicago.edu/~npope/pretrial_paper.pdf Year: 2016 Country: United States URL: http://home.uchicago.edu/~npope/pretrial_paper.pdf Shelf Number: 147409 Keywords: BailGuilty PleasIndigent DefendantsPretrial DetentionPretrial Justice |
Author: Human Rights Watch Title: An Offer You Can't Refuse: How US Federal Prosecutors Force Drug Defendants to Plead Guilty Summary: An Offer You Can't Refuse: How US Federal Prosecutors Force Drug Defendants to Plead Guilty, details how federal prosecutors routinely threaten extraordinarily severe prison sentences to coerce drug defendants into surrendering their right to trial and pleading guilty. Prosecutors charge or threaten to charge offenses with harsh mandatory sentences and mandatory sentencing enhancements. They then offer defendants a much lower sentence in exchange for pleading guilty. In 97 percent of federal drug cases, defendants accept plea bargains. In the rare cases in which defendants insist on going to trial, prosecutors make good on their threats. The average sentence for federal drug offenders convicted after trial was three times longer than for defendants who pled guilty. This report is based on numerous interviews with federal prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges, and the review of hundreds of cases. It also includes new statistics developed by Human Rights Watch that provide the most recent and detailed measure of what the report calls the "trial penalty" - the difference in sentences for drug defendants who plead guilty compared with those for defendants convicted after trial. Judges have been reduced to virtual bystanders in cases involving mandatory sentences. When prosecutors choose to pursue mandatory penalties and the defendant is convicted, judges must impose the mandatory sentences, even if they are disproportionately long relative to the defendant's conduct and role in the offense. They cannot exercise their traditional role of tailoring sentences to each defendant's conduct and culpability and of making sentences no longer than necessary to serve the purposes of punishment. Human Rights Watch calls on Congress to restore sentencing discretion to federal judges in drug cases. It also calls on the attorney general to ensure that prosecutors pursue just sentences in all cases and do not use the threat of disproportionately long sentences to strong-arm defendants into surrendering their fundamental human right to trial. Details: New York: HRW, 2013. 132p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 19, 2017 at: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us1213_ForUpload_0_0_0.pdf Year: 2013 Country: United States URL: https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/us1213_ForUpload_0_0_0.pdf Shelf Number: 131764 Keywords: Drug Offenders Guilty PleasProsecutors |
Author: Poynton, Suzanne Title: The NSW Rolling List Court Evaluation: Preliminary Report Summary: Aim: To determine whether greater efficiency can be achieved through application of the Rolling List Court (RLC) model to NSW District Criminal Court matters. Method: A non-blinded randomised trial was initiated in which eligible District Criminal Court matters were randomly assigned, after committal, either to the RLC or to the general court list. Each matter had an equal chance of being assigned to the RLC. Between March 2015 and April 2016, 110 matters were entered into the ballot; 51 of these were assigned to the RLC and 59 were assigned to the general court list. Results: By the end of July 2016 a significantly higher proportion of matters balloted to the RLC had been finalised compared with matters dealt with in the general court list (65% vs. 37%). Further, a higher proportion of matters dealt with by the RLC resulted in a guilty plea than matters dealt with by the control courts (63% vs. 41%). A guilty plea was entered within 3 months of ballot for nearly one in five (18%) of all the RLC matters. This compares with just 5% of matters dealt with in the control courts. Conclusion: From these early results the success of the RLC to date is promising. Further analyses should be undertaken once all balloted matters have been finalised to confirm the interim findings presented here. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2016. 6p. Source: Internet Resource: Issue Paper no. 120: Accessed November 30, 2017 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2016-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-BB120.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/BB/Report-2016-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-BB120.pdf Shelf Number: 148594 Keywords: Court DelaysCriminal CourtGuilty Pleas |
Author: Rahman, Sara Title: The NSW Rolling List Court Evaluation: Final Report Summary: Aim: To assess whether the application of an alternative court model with fixed teams of lawyers operating on a rolling basis in the NSW District Criminal Court resulted in greater efficiency in the resolution of indictable criminal matters relative to the regular operation of the NSW District Court, and to identify the successful elements and mechanisms of the Rolling List Court (RLC) model. Method: A randomised controlled trial was conducted in the NSW District Criminal Court (NSW DCC), where eligible matters were balloted with 50:50 odds to the RLC or the general list of the NSW DCC. The proportion of early guilty pleas relative to late guilty pleas, trials reaching a verdict and no-bills were compared between the courts, and survival analysis was used to analyse the time taken to reach a guilty plea and to finalise matters in both courts. Stakeholder interviews were conducted to identify the key mechanisms behind the RLC, as well as any other benefits or drawbacks of the model. Results: More than half (58.0 %) of the matters balloted to the RLC resolved in a guilty plea before the trial date, compared to 22.0 per cent of the matters randomised to the general list of the NSW DCC. There were marked improvements in the average time taken to reach a guilty plea (t=-3.43; p-value<.001), to list matters for trial (t=-5.14; p-value<.001) and to finalise matters (t=-3.93; p-value<.001) in the RLC. Further evidence of faster resolution in the RLC was found through survival analyses of the time taken to reach a guilty plea (HR=1.73; 95% CI (1.08, 2.78); p-value=.023) and to finalise matters (HR=1.90; 95% CI (1.29, 2.79); p-value=.001). Stakeholders interviewed indicated that early briefing and negotiation was crucial to obtaining earlier guilty pleas, and further benefits to efficiency arose from the fixed-team composition of the court. Conclusion: The RLC proved effective at obtaining early guilty pleas and reducing delay in the processing of indictable criminal matters. The findings suggest that efforts to introduce some elements of the RLC, such as early briefing of practitioners and pre-trial negotiations, could have benefits for the NSW DCC's efficiency. Details: Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research, 2017. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Contemporary Issues in crime and Justice, no. 208: Accessed February 5, 2018 at: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/2018-Report-The-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-Fianl-Report.pdf Year: 2017 Country: Australia URL: http://www.bocsar.nsw.gov.au/Documents/CJB/2018-Report-The-NSW-Rolling-List-Court-Evaluation-Fianl-Report.pdf Shelf Number: 148989 Keywords: Court Delays Criminal Court Guilty Pleas |
Author: Flynn, Asher Title: Plea negotiations: An empirical analysis Summary: Negotiating guilty pleas ('plea bargaining') is a central element of criminal justice processes in Australia, yet little is known outside the legal community about the frequency and outcomes of plea negotiations. This study addresses this important knowledge gap through qualitative and quantitative analysis of cases that were resolved through negotiated guilty pleas in Victorian courts. The study found that negotiations are used in almost all cases of guilty pleas across all court levels and often involve an extensive negotiation process. The study highlighted differences in the way negotiations play out in summary and indictable courts and identified 14 different forms of plea negotiation. Details: Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 2018. 13p. Source: Internet Resource: Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 544: Accessed April 30, 2018 at: https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi544 Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: https://aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/tandi544 Shelf Number: 149959 Keywords: Guilty PleasPlea Bargaining |
Author: Flynn, Asher Title: Plea negotiations Summary: Research Aims This report provides an empirical account of current plea negotiation practices in the state of Victoria, including documenting the frequency of plea negotiations, identifying the different forms of plea negotiation and common resolution outcomes, and discussing the processes involved in reaching an agreement. The study involved the development of a dataset of negotiated guilty pleas through a comprehensive mixed qualitative and quantitative analysis of Victoria Legal Aid (VLA) deidentified case files that had resolved by guilty pleas; conducting qualitative, in-depth interviews with police prosecutors, Office of Public Prosecutions (OPP) solicitors, Crown prosecutors, defence practitioners (VLA employees and those in private practice) and judicial officers; as well as carrying out consultations with key legal stakeholders. Results This study found that between 87 and 100 per cent of guilty pleas entered at all levels of the Victorian courts are the result of a negotiated agreement between the prosecutor and the defence. It identified 14 forms of plea negotiation across the interview and de-identified case file datasets, and found that it was not uncommon for several forms to be used in the one case. The most common forms of plea negotiation in Victoria include: (1) withdrawing and substituting charges, (2) rolled-up charges and representative counts, (3) negotiating an agreed summary of facts, and (4) agreements on the prosecution's sentencing submission. The mean number of charges withdrawn in each case within the dataset was 3.24. Prior to a resolution there were 6.42 charges per case and post a resolution, the mean number of charges an accused pleaded guilty to was 3.18. The most common offenses negotiated were those where there are multiple alternative charges available (such as intentionally or recklessly causing serious injury and intentionally or recklessly causing injury), gross violence offenses, aggravated burglary and assaults. This was partly due to police charging offenders with multiple offenses covering the same course of conduct (sometimes referred to as overcharging), which provided a basis for negotiating the withdrawal of these charges. Armed robbery and drug offenses were also common subjects of negotiation. Offenses least likely to be negotiated were sexual offenses, homicides and family violence matters. This study found that the negotiation process is often quite extensive, with multiple interactions taking place between the parties before an agreement is reached. The negotiations occurred by phone, email/letter and face to face, with the most common communication method for negotiations being email (74 per cent of de-identified case files). Across the de-identified case file dataset, all guilty pleas were entered prior to trial, with the majority entered prior to the committal hearing (81 per cent). Four key considerations framed the plea negotiation process: (1) the strength of the evidence, (2) the public interest (for prosecutors), (3) the personalities of the opposing party, and (4) the client's interests (for defense practitioners). Defense practitioners initiated almost all the discussions (91 per cent), although it is becoming more common for prosecutors in both the summary and indictable streams to commence discussions - a practice encouraged by the main guidelines governing prosecutorial conduct in plea negotiations in Victoria. 1 There are various levels of internal authorizing and accountability mechanism operating within the OPP and Victoria Police in relation to accepting a guilty plea to lesser charges, suggesting that, while plea negotiations are not officially recognised in legislation, they constitute a widely accepted criminal justice procedure that forms part of a litigious process. This study found that a strong early resolution culture permeates the courts, VLA, Victoria Police and the OPP, which may, in part, contribute to the high rate of guilty pleas entered in Victoria each year. Indeed, there has been a noticeable shift in all facets of the legal process in Victoria (as evident elsewhere in Australia) towards a commitment to early resolution, where appropriate. There are significant differences in the way in which plea negotiations are conducted in the summary jurisdiction, compared to the manner in which indictable cases are handled. This is partly due to the nature of the offenses heard in the summary stream, the fast pace of the Magistrates' Court compared to the higher courts, and the different approaches defense practitioners adopt when dealing with police prosecutors as opposed to when they are negotiating with OPP solicitors and Crown prosecutors. This study found that the early resolution-focused pre-contest hearings that operate in the Magistrates' Court (the summary case conference and the contest mention) strongly facilitate plea negotiations at an early stage of the process. However, the success of the contest mention is highly dependent on the magistrate involved, which can lead to inconsistencies in the effectiveness of this hearing. The research also identified some limitations in the out-of-court summary case conference process which arise from the lack of resourcing, the high workloads of police prosecutors, and the absence of specific funding for VLA practitioners to prepare and engage in summary case conference work. These limitations hinder the effectiveness of what could be a highly successful early resolution-focused process. The study revealed a number of adverse effects of the reductions in funding and tightening of eligibility criteria for VLA service provision. In relation to plea negotiations, in particular, it was found that changes to funding structures have resulted in an increase in self-represented accused persons. This has negatively affected the outcome and timeliness of negotiations, and the role of the magistrate and the police prosecutor (who are inappropriately being forced to become quasi-defense practitioners), and created more delays in the system overall. The research also found that unrepresented accused persons were at a disadvantage in attempting to negotiate with police prosecutors, and at greater risk of succumbing to pressures to make agreements without fully understanding the implications of their guilty plea. This was of particular concern in relation to offenders with a mental impairment. The findings indicated that the proportion of accused persons with a mental illness appearing before the courts was very high. Evidence of mental illness was presented in 60 per cent of the de-identified case files, and the interview data suggested that the rates are even higher. In addition to shedding light on the plea negotiation process, the study found that the sentence indication process is operating very effectively in the Magistrates' Court. However, its usefulness is minimal in the higher courts because it is limited to an indication of whether a custodial or non-custodial sanction might be imposed, but not its possible length. There is also a perception among defense practitioners that it is constrained by the requirement of prosecutorial approval. It was identified that, in general, the requirement on the court to specify the sentence it would have imposed, but for a guilty plea being entered under Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic) s 6AAA, ostensibly functions as a means of demonstrating the discount the accused has received for their guilty plea - but this requirement has not been well received by the legal community. While most participants found the statement to be artificial and unrealistic, there may be some significant benefits for the accused in having the sentence discount articulated that may justify its retention. This study revealed that the High Court's decision in Barbaro v The Queen; Zirilli v The Queen , which prohibited prosecutors from providing a sentencing range to the court as part of their sentencing submission, has changed, but not removed sentence negotiations from the process. While the High Court's decision has appeared to halt negotiations on the numerical range of the prison sentence that the prosecutor may submit to the court, negotiations still occur in relation to the prosecutor's sentencing submission about the amount of time already served in custody that should be taken into account by the sentencing judge, the appropriateness of a Community Correction Order (CCO) or its combination with a sentence of imprisonment. Finally, this study identified that the introduction of presumptive and mandatory sentencing regimes (such as the mandatory four-year minimum for gross violence offenses) affects plea negotiations by putting pressure on accused persons to accept an agreement to plead guilty to a lesser offense that does not carry a mandatory penalty, even where there may be a strong case that the accused is not guilty of that lesser offense. These regimes also sometimes place pressure on prosecutors to negotiate a plea of guilty to an offense that does not carry a mandatory sentence, in order to avoid going to trial. Details: Canberra: Criminology Research Advisory Council, 2018. 186p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 30, 2018 at: http://crg.aic.gov.au/reports/1718/51-1314-FinalReport.pdf Year: 2018 Country: Australia URL: http://crg.aic.gov.au/reports/1718/51-1314-FinalReport.pdf Shelf Number: 149970 Keywords: Guilty PleasPlea Bargaining |