Plea bargaining is a mutual agreement between a defendant and a prosecutor whereby a defendant implores guilty to a lesser charge for a more lenient sentence. Plea bargaining involves making appropriate recommendations for a particular conviction or a dismissal of other charges ( Helm & Reyna, 2017) . Usually, those who support plea bargaining argue that it reduces the time for court proceedings and assurances sentence, but those opposing it believe that plea bargaining prevents justice from taking place accordingly. Despite the extensive spread use of plea of bargaining, it is associated with various issues which affect court proceeding and prosecution for law offenders. The most noted issues related to plea bargaining include the following: Helm and Reyna (2017) argue that approximately 90% of cases in many authorities go a pleas bargain rather than of a fair trial. However, reports show that the concept contributes to the lack of proper investigation and prosecution process. In most instances, law enforcement officers and the attorneys may fail to prepare a case as required by the law since they believe that most instances will plead out ( Helm & Reyna, 2017) . Instead of working towards securing justice in case of offenses, the advocate for a deal of plea bargaining, which is not the most appropriate way of seeking justice. As such, to promote justice in case of any offense, there is a need for law enforcement officers and attorneys to spend enough time preparing for a situation rather than waiting for plea bargaining. Since this issue does not advocate for the legal investigatory process of the case, it adversely undermines the system of the law because it encourages unfair and unjust court ruling. Another significant issue associated with plea is that it blocks the opportunities for fair trials to be done by the jury. In the United States of American, every citizen has a constitutional right to a fair trial by the jury in case of an offense. However, the concept of plea bargaining attempts to ignore fair trials, thus leading to waive off the right to have a fair trial. Such action leads to pressuring the defendant to accept a plea bargaining deal seems to be illegal since it forces the defendant to agree with the verdict or judgment about the case without making proper consultation with his or her attorney ( Helm & Reyna, 2017) . As such, this issue a significant factor that affects fair and just judgment in a case. This issue directly deprives citizens of their constitutional rights; it adversely undermines the system of the law since it does not give room for a fair and just court ruling on a case. Typically, cases that involve plea bargaining and agreement block the defendant to appeal for the decision made by the jury since the case goes to trial and defendant losses. According to the concept of plea bargaining, a defendant is required to plead guilty to the charges they are accused of having committed. The fees defendants are charged to have determined may be reduced, eliminating the chances to forward appeal when they are not contended by the decision of the plea ( Langer, 2019) . Since this issue does not encourage the defendant's appeal, it unfavorably undermines the system of the law because it promotes unfair and unjust court ruling. Therefore, to support a fair and just judgment in any case proceedings, it is essential to find possible ways of eliminating this issue to avoid its effects. Furthermore, a plea bargain is associated with relatively lighter prosecution for guilty people, which can make the defendant escaping some necessary prosecution process to assist in fair judgment on a case by the jury. The concept of plea bargain implies that when the defendant plea and guaranteed sentence in some instances are the same as being found guilty. As such, this can lead to unfair judgment because attorneys and prosecutors make decisions based on the ability of the defendants to plea for charges filed against them. Since plea bargain does not follow ethical principles and legal procedures in making court judgments on cases presented to the prosecutor. The latter means that it undermines the law system since it does not give room for a fair and just court ruling on a case ( Langer, 2019) . Therefore, to promote fairness ruling in court cases, there is a need for the attorney and prosecutors to consider fair trials rather than waiting for plea bargain by the defendants. Incentives behind plea bargain for judges, prosecutors, and defendants are factors that motivate these groups of individuals to consider plea bargaining over choosing fair trials. Various factors make judges, prosecutors, and defendants prefer plea over other legal forms of prosecution and sentencing. The following are some of these motivating factors: The creation of certainty is one of the main driving factors that motivate judges, prosecutors, and defendants to choose a plea of bargaining over other prosecution processes. Usually, prosecutors are never sure of the outcome of cases when they take the defendant to a fair trial. As such, there is a possibility that the jury might find the defendant not guilty or guilty. Therefore, employing plea bargaining establishes certainty for a conviction before a case is forwarded to the jury to determine that the defendant is not guilty ( Miceli, 2019) . Due to this, most judges, prosecutors, and defendants consider the concept of plea bargaining to speed up prosecution process rather than choosing a trial, which may take a long time and ultimately finds out that the defendant is not guilty. Eliminating uncertainty away from the legal process is another driving factor that catalyzes encourage judges, prosecutors, and defendants to consider plea bargaining. Typically, plea bargaining works towards eliminating the uncertainty of the outcome of the case when it through trial and prosecution ( Miceli, 2019) . Since the result of a claim is not known because it depends on the evidence presented to the court. However, when plea bargaining encourages judges, prosecutors, and defendants to consider this concept of plea to avoid the uncertainty of the legal process of any court case. The latter implies that the need to eliminate uncertainty from trial and judicial will ensure appropriate judgment. For example, the outcome of instances where take the defendant to a fair trial. Intrinsically, there is an opportunity that the jury might find the defendant not guilty or guilty. Under such a situation, a plea of bargaining is encouraged to help in finding a solution to the case that might be associated with uncertainty in the legal process. In summary, a plea bargain is a mutual agreement between a defendant and a prosecutor whereby a defendant implores guilty to a lesser charge for a more lenient sentence. A plea bargain is associated with many issues that are likely to affect the trial and prosecution process. The provision of a soft justice for the guilty is one key to driving factors that contributes to pleas by defendants.
References
Berdejó, C. (2018). Criminalizing Race: Racial disparities in plea-bargaining. BCL, Rev. , 59 , 1187.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Helm, R. K., & Reyna, V. F. (2017). Logical but incompetent plea decisions: A new approach to plea bargaining grounded in cognitive theory. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law , 23 (3), 367.
Langer, M. (2019). Plea Bargaining, Trial-Avoiding Conviction Mechanisms, and the Global Administratization of Criminal Convictions. Annu. Rev. Criminol. DOI ; 10 .
Miceli, T. J. (2019). Plea Bargaining: Negotiated Justice. In The Paradox of Punishment (pp. 97-117). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
