Who is more likely to plead guilty?

Abstract

The American constitutions allows all its citizens rights to fair hearing and treatment in a court of law. Nevertheless, this is yet to actualize given that majority of the suspects belonging to minority groups plead guilty to charges in court whether they are guilty or not. Firstly, lack of financial strength to pay for the defending counsels increases the chances of them pleading guilty to charges against them. Similarly, an individual can plead guilty to avoid the uncertainties involved in a pre-trial hearing. Finally, a suspect from a minority group might plead guilty following the counsel advice aimed at easing the charges and pursuing a more lenient sentence. It is essential that the federal government addresses the arising disparities within its criminal justice system aimed at giving equal treatment to all its citizens regardless of their racial affiliation.

Introduction

Pleading guilty indicates that an individual charged for committing a specific crime accepts the charges and the police report summarizing the issue. Pleading guilty means that an offender will not go through trial, instead, the judge will move directly to sentencing the individual. However, the judges declares the sentencing in the next scheduled hearing. It is important for the defense lawyers to ensure that the charged criminal understands the privileges lost by pleading guilty. Similarly, the lead counsel should also ensure that the defendants understand the probable consequences associated with the practice in a court of law. The defense counsel can advise the client to plead guilty even though he or she is innocent of committing the crime (Helm et al., 2018) . Additionally, the accused person can plead guilty aimed at avoiding the uncertainties involved with a trial. For instance, the prosecutors are likely to uncover additional evidence capable of convicting an individual during the trial and enable the judge to convict the suspect. Defense counsel must ensure that the offender understands the diverse perspectives involved with pleading guilty.

The criminal justice system in America encourages racial disparity when sentencing offenders. Minority defendants encounter direct discrimination based on racial affiliation in federal courts. For instance, the Blacks are more likely to face longer sentences while Latinos face the risk incarceration than the White offenders with similar charges (Miller, 2015) . Furthermore, the minority groups like the Blacks and Latinos face harsh sentences compared to the White offenders after committing crimes marked as lower-level such as property crimes. Based on the structure and practices encouraged in the American justice system, racial affiliation of an individual is likely to influence the outcome of the case and an outcome of a sentence. Consequently, it is likely that minority offenders are likely to plead guilty in a court of law compared to the Whites aimed at minimizing the uncertainties involved with going through a trial.

The American constitution allows all citizens fair hearing regardless of the racial affiliation for the offender. Accordingly, it is essential that the government considers a strategy that will change the system and practices that disadvantages the minorities in a court of law. The focus should be at giving individuals an equal chance to hearing and eliminate the factors that disadvantage the minority groups and enable them enjoy similar rights with the Whites who enjoy protection by the governing bodies.

Theoretical framework

Lack of funds to compensate defense attorneys

Offenders in minority racial groups in the United States do not access quality defense teams during trial because they lack financial strength to hire their own attorneys increasing reliance on public defenders. However, the public defenders are often overworked due to the overwhelming number of offenders that seek for their representation. In most cases, the public defender exceed the limit of cases that a lawyer should have at a time. Consequently, it is likely that an offender within the minority groups in the country will face trial without representation of a defending counsel. Alternatively, offenders that manage to secure a counsel to represent them in a court hearing are likely to acquire lower quality services compared to those that manage to hire private counsels. Firstly, the defending counsel has the responsibility of investigating the charges an accused person faces and establish the weak links in the charge sheet (Van Brunt, 2015) . Nevertheless, it is unlikely that the defending counsel will get adequate time to investigate the cases due to the decimation of cases. Furthermore, the attorneys engage in a violation of their constitutional obligation of investigating facts when providing legal representation to the accused persons. Consequently, using public defense is likely to expose an offender to being found guilty by the jury and subjected to a severe sentence. Similarly, using public defense leads to the delaying of cases due to the lack of unavailability of the attorneys.

Accordingly, the offender is likely to face pre-trial detainment for a prolonged period without facing a trial. Consequently, such a scenario denies the offenders their right given by the principle of innocent-until-proven guilty in a court of law. An individual might consider pleading guilty even though innocent to avoid the pre-trial detainment and the uncertainties involved in the waiting period. Lacking financial strength plays a critical role in denying individuals quality legal representation as a way of facilitating their defense in court and be successful.

The Sixth Amendment of the constitution indicates that every accused person has the right to counsel in scenarios where incarceration is a possible punishment. Nevertheless, this has not been the case in the American criminal justice system as offenders get denied their right of representation based on their socioeconomic status and racial affiliation. However, the few minority individuals with capability to hire counsels’ benefit by hiring themselves a quality counsel that will treat their cases with equal seriousness as when they present the Whites. Failure to have a defense counsel in court increases the chances of the offender being found guilty by the judges and face a severe sentence such as incarceration (Joy, 2010) . Furthermore, based on their socioeconomic status, the minorities are likely to experience discrimination by law enforcers within the criminal justice system. For instance, the crimes that minority groups face in courts of law are of a higher rate compared to the Whites facing similar charges. The court demonstrates a lower rate in dismissing cases against the minorities even when there is little evidence or none at all that can facilitate conviction of a suspect. On the other hand, the courts illustrate more willingness to issue arrests warrants against offenders ranked as minorities as opposed to the majority Whites (Pratt et al., 2016) . Consequently, the unlawful biasness against people in the minority groups begin with the law enforces that are likely to arrest the minorities compared to other individuals in the society.

The people of color who make the minority groups in the United States are likely to comprise of individuals who live in poor backgrounds. Consequently, the minority groups have more chances of facing accusations at court whether low-level or high-grade crimes. They also face higher chances of judges finding them guilty of crimes they face in court and sentenced severely compared to White offenders facing similar charges. However, lack of adequate funds to pay their attorneys increases the chances of them being found guilty even when they are innocent. The uncertainties involved in courts during case proceedings make the minority offenders plead guilty and avoid following the procedural and be disappointed. Lack of funding facilitates poor defense representation and increases chances of the offender being found guilty even when innocent and face sentencing.

Avoid uncertainties involved during the pre-trial period

A suspect has the right not to plead guilty and follow all the required procedures in a trial where one faces the judges and defend self against the crimes leveled against one. Furthermore, the defense counsel provides the accused persons with a plea bargain when the prosecutor does not show the incentive to discuss about the issue (Gerstein, 2016) . In such scenarios, the accused persons prefers to go through a trial as a way of pursuing a better outcome after the trial. Similarly, pleading guilty does not give an individual a privilege to put once life in order as a way of preparing for a conviction that can influence an individual’s life for a long time. Consequently, an individual might consider going through trial as a way of buying time and planning for the life ahead. Conviction in a court of law has some other negative social consequences on an individual’s life such as losing custody for one’s children (U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice, 2010) . Hence, a suspect is likely to choose going through a trial in a hope that he or she will be redeemed from the negative consequences associated with conviction. It is essential to also acknowledge that pleading guilty denies a suspect several rights such as right to counsel, appeal, and testing the strength of the evidence presented against an individual. Consequently, it is critical for individuals to ensure that they acquire advice from a legal counsel aimed at enhancing the value of the decision made. Nevertheless, a suspect is likely to plead guilty and overlook all the advantages associated with a trial process due to the uncertainties associated with a pre-trial process.

The pre-trial period in the American criminal justice system involves several systematic activities that are likely to influence the suspect due to the prolonged period that one must wait before sentencing. A case in the United States begins when the prosecutor does not demonstrate the willingness to engage in plea bargain, which in most cases makes an individual plead guilty for a lighter sentencing. However, the prosecutor might make a decision to go through the trial process which begins the trial procedure. The charges undergoes a review process in a lower court aimed at determining whether there is sufficient evidence to uphold the trial (Greene, 2015) . If the findings shows that it is possible to prove that an individual is guilty of the charges, the cases move ahead. Other procedures involved include first appearance, plea taking, bail hearing, grand jury review, preliminary hearing, arraignment, pre-trial hearing, and sentencing. The jury has a constitutional obligation to deny the accused individuals right of bail indicating that the suspect will stay in jail during the pre-trial period. The pre-trial jailing does not account to the sentence that the court will subject the accused person. Additionally, pre-trial period can take a prolonged period as the courts have an overwhelming case load. Consequently, it is likely that the accused person will end up staying in jail for a prolonged period than if the individual just pleaded guilty and went through sentencing. Another factor that is likely to influence the pretrial period is the use of public defendants among the minority group that have several accused persons to present in court and find them justice. However, the public defense counsels do not give their clients quality services because they lack time to investigate the cases thus increasing the chances that an individual will be found guilty. Consequently, the accused minorities might prefer to plead guilty and avoid the uncertainties involved in the case.

Advise by the defense counsel

A suspect is likely to plead guilty in a scenario whereby the lead counsel advises the individual to do so following the investigation of the case and the benefits that can be achieved from the practice. The prosecutor and defense counsel can have deliberations aimed at convincing the accused person to plead guilty and avoid going through the full trial. The minority groups are likely to plead guilty when accused of a certain crime even when one is innocent aimed at accessing simple charges and more lenient sentence (Helm et al., 2018) . The suspects belonging to minority groups in the United States are unlikely to be given bail during the trial period which increases the chances of them going through pre-trial jailing. Consequently, pleading guilty helps the individual to save time that one will have to face incarceration and reconnect with other members of a society (Gerstein, 2016) . Additionally, the individual avoids the uncertainties involved in the trial process, which the prosecutors also face. Finally, pleading guilty in a court of law increases the chances that the jury will consider a more lenient sentencing towards the offender compared to when an individual goes through a full trial. A pre-trial process exposes the family of the accused person to scrutiny by both the media and law enforcers, which might result into unnecessary attention that can cause harm to them. Consequently, offenders consider pleading guilty as a way of protecting their families from the humiliation subjected to them. Similarly, the publicity involved during the pre-trial period is also likely to negatively influence the family of the accused person by associating the individual into a certain crime which might result into stigma. Accordingly, the accused person might find it challenging to overcome the stigma even after undergoing the conviction and being set free (U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice, 2010) . Such an incident has the potential to make the life of the convict unbearable and painful. Subsequently, individuals plead guilty to protect themselves from the stigma associated with conviction among members of society. It is essential to note that even though a counsel can advise an individual to plead guilty, the suspect has the final decision on whether to agree or not agree with the advisory. Consequently, it is illegal to force a suspect plead guilty to charges that he or she is unwilling to engage in such a practice. The suspect also has the right of getting an explanation on why the counsel feels that pleading guilty has more benefits for the individual facing the trial.

Current focus 

The current focus should target at ensuring that the racial disparities with the criminal justice system in the United System is addressed. Consequently, both the minorities and the Whites should have equal opportunities and treatment when facing the trial in the court of laws. The minority suspects charged with various crimes in court of law plead guilty due to the disparities based on their socioeconomic status. Accordingly, correcting the issues arising within the criminal justice system in the country requires that the federal government creates measures that addresses the factors that disadvantage the minority groups.

Achieving free and fair trial among the minority groups in the United States requires that the law enforcers are just when arresting individuals for crimes committed. It is clear that law enforcers are likely to arrest minority offenders compared to the Whites even after committing similar crimes (Miller, 2015) . The law enforcers should desist from arresting offenders in minority groups for petty crimes that they do not arrest the Whites for. Such a measure will ensure that members of society gets the same treatment and they do not face petty charges that can lead them to face undeserving sentences. Similarly, the federal government must comply with the constitutional provision where it assures every accused person the right for attorney. The federal government has made a considerable move of hiring public defense attorneys that serve the accused people with no capability to pay for counsels (Helm et al., 2018) . However, a considerable failure arises because the government hired only a few attorneys that do not match the demand for public defense counsel in courts. Consequently, the minority offenders ends up getting poor services because their cases are not well investigated. The federal government can mend this by hiring a higher number of counsels that matches the number of suspects that needs representations in court. A considerate counsel and suspect ratio is convenient enough to enable the counsels investigate the cases well and reduce the chances of innocent minority suspects being proved guilty for crimes that they did not commit. Additionally, the juries must be just in the manner in which they address cases between the minority groups and the Whites. For instance, the jury should allow suspects from minority groups similar privileges with the Whites by giving them bail and avoid them facing pre-trial jailing. Additionally, the jury should also find a balance on the sentences they subject the minority and White suspects for similar crimes (Helm et al., 2018) . The federal government should also hire additional judges to hear all the pending cases and reduce the waiting period during the pre-trial period. Such measures will play an essential role in reducing chances that suspects within the minority groups avoid pleading guilty and fail to enjoy all the rights and privileges associated with trial process for a suspect.

Conclusion

Individuals belonging to minority groups within the United States are more likely to plead guilty for charges they face in a court of law regardless of whether the individual is guilty of the crime or innocent. Additionally, the idea of pleading guilty to a crime committed might originate from both a plea bargain between the prosecutor and the defense counsel. On the other hand, a suspect might solely make the individual to plead guilty to charges in a court of law aimed at minimizing the uncertainties associated in a pre-trial process. Additionally, suspects from minority groups plead guilty to crimes committed due to their socioeconomic status. The individuals belong to poor backgrounds and lack enough funds that will facilitate payment of counsel fees. Accordingly, it becomes extremely difficult for the minority suspects to get quality hearing or representation in a court of law. Subsequently, since the American constitution gives suspects the right counsel and fair hearing, the government should ensure that it enables the poor similar treatment with the Whites in the country.

References

Gerstein, C. (2016). Plea Bargaining and Prosecutorial Motives.  The University of New Hampshire Law Review ,  15 (1). https://scholars.unh.edu/unh_lr/vol15/iss1/1/

Greene, S. S. (2015). Race, Class, and Access to Civil Justice.  SSRN Electronic Journal . https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2592150

Helm, R. K., Reyna, V. F., Franz, A. A., Novick, R. Z., Dincin, S., & Cort, A. E. (2018). Limitations on the Ability to Negotiate Justice: Attorney Perspectives on Guilt, Innocence, and Legal Advice in the Current Plea System.  Psychology, Crime & Law : PC & L ,  24 (9), 915–934. https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2018.1457672  

Joy, P. (2010).  UNEQUAL ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL . http://law.ku.edu/sites/law.drupal.ku.edu/files/docs/law_journal/v24/Joy%20Final.pdf

Miller, A. (2015).  The Effects of Gender, Race, and Age on Judicial Sentencing Decisions . https://dc.etsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3922&context=etd  

Pratt, T. C., Barnes, J. C., Cullen, F. T., & Turanovic, J. J. (2016). “I Suck at Everything”: Crime, Arrest, and the Generality of Failure.  Deviant Behavior ,  37 (8), 837–851. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2016.1147809

U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice. (2010).  Family Life and Delinquency and Crime A Policymakers’Guide . to the Literature . https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/140517NCJRS.pdf  

Van Brunt, A. (2015, June 19).  Public defenders are overworked and underfunded. That means more people go to jail . The Guardian; The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/17/poor-rely-public-defenders-too-overworked