Plea Bargaining 5
Therole of the prosecutor in plea bargaining
Theprosecutor plays an importantrole in the plea bargaining process. First, they try to they giveappropriate offers for the accused in accordance to the mistakes forthe cases solvedin court. They offer the clients an alternative that is cheaperwithout involving the judge. Secondly, the prosecutor tries toestablish justice for the public or the person who isoffended(Lippke,2006).They point out evidence that shows why the client should be in prisonfor the maximum possible term. Finally, the prosecutor opposes in thebargain in the judgement. He ensures that the termgiven is consistent and exceeds the minimum term that isset(Scott, Stuntz, Easterbrook, & Schulhofer, 1992).For instance, whereas probation is an indication,in this case, it is the minimum sentencethe prosecutor ensures that the punishment exceeds the minimum
Asa prosecutor, in this case,Iwould recommend for the maximum term of 13 years in gaol.Sneaky is guilty as judged. He had a gun and used the gun on thecashier. Thiswillattract aterm,not less than threeyears(Lynch,2003).For this, the use of the gunfor the accomplishmentof crime will attract threeyears. For involvement in the violence-enhancedrobbery, Iwill propose for the maximum term of 10 years. Then Iwill recommendthe termsto run consecutively setting the termat 13 years. The fact that Sneaky has a boring past and is on drugssolidifies this. Therefore, the habit is likely to recur.
Itis clear that the accused gotinvolvedin a robberyand attempted to hide. There is also proof that the accused also hadthe gun pointed to the victims head. Thefact that, the accused had a history ofsubstance and alcohol abuse isonly an escapeblame. Leaving such a person to the community is not desirable owingtheharmthey may cause.
Priorto the agreeing of the plea, the prosecutor can consult with theothers. Thisincludesthe accused and the defence attorney to ensure they accept the offer.Besides, he needs to consult withthe accuserto ensure they are comfortable with this decision.
Therole of defence attorney in plea bargaining
Thedefence attorney has a great role of showing the innocence of theclient. Either they bargain for lesser terms in the cases where it isobvious they committed the crime. They speak on behave of the clientand advise on matters that pertain to the law(Lippke,2006).They try to establish factors that surround the client aggravatingthem to commit the crimes.
Sneakydeserves to be onprobation rather than in prison. He has had an unpleasant pasttherefore punishing him further will not reform him. Punishmentserves to correct the error the person did.Therefore,the Sneaky deserves a correctional measure that will benefit him.Prison is not a place for a person lie sneaky. Besides, the motivebehind the stealing is apparent,his lifestyle of drug and substance abuse therefore it will be betterto try to eliminate these first.
Thecommunity-basedcorrectional facility seems to fit Sneaky. Sneaky does not possessany skill, putting him away in prison will worsen this. Heshould be in aplacehe can learn to serve others, the community probation. Therefore,probation can be adequate in this case
Therole of the judge in the plea bargaining
Theprimaryrole of the judge in is being the arbitrator and the chief decisionmaker(Lippke,2006).The judge listens keenly to both side of the case then reaches thedecision that will benefit both sides. He makes the final judgementbased on the evidence given.
Inthis case, the judge has three options. To put Sneaky to probation,sentence him to a minimum of three years or give him a sentencereviewed under recommendation. In each case, it depends on theability of the defence attorney to convince the judge to either aminimum sentence of probation on the community programme. The defenceattorney can also bargain with the prosecutor for the minimumsentence. In addition, the judge may prefer to put Sneaky ina prison and release him later on recommendation. With this,however, the crime may recur.
PuttingSneaky onprobation is not risk-freebut it is worth trying. The fact that he does not have an adequateeducation does not mean that he is not going anywhere. Not all thepeople with inadequate education stagnant at all stages of their lifeothers can proper with adequate motivation. Judging Sneaky based onhis trainingwill benot only unfair,but also discriminatory. That is why probation most suits thisclient. With probation, the client is likely to acquire the basics toutilisein daily life. On the other hand, if the fact that he is not goinganywhere has its basis inhis past it will be erroneous and based on fallacious thoughts. Thisclient is still young with muchlifeahead of him therefore locking him up will be not appropriatepunishment for him.
Lippke,R. L. (2006). Retributivism and . CriminalJustice Ethics.doi:10.1080/0731129X.2006.9992198
Lynch,T. (2003). The Case Against . Regulation,26(3),24–27.
Scott,R. E., Stuntz, W. J., Easterbrook, F. H., & Schulhofer, S. J.(1992). as Contract. YaleLaw Journal, 101(8).Doi:10.2307/796952