 {"id":2039,"date":"2016-01-13T18:59:56","date_gmt":"2016-01-13T18:59:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/live-journal-of-law-and-public-policy.pantheonsite.io\/?p=2039"},"modified":"2016-01-13T18:59:56","modified_gmt":"2016-01-13T18:59:56","slug":"plea-bargains-the-plea-bargainers-dilemma","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/2016\/01\/13\/plea-bargains-the-plea-bargainers-dilemma\/","title":{"rendered":"Plea Bargains &#8212; The Plea Bargainer&#8217;s Dilemma"},"content":{"rendered":"<span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Suppose two of your friends drive over to your house in New Jersey and pick you up for, what you believe, is a night on the town. As their car is pulling out of your driveway, two police cars pull up, sirens blaring, and the officers jump out, weapons drawn. You are arrested and charged as an accomplice in a robbery your friends just committed. <\/span>\n\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400\">You retain counsel, and she has bad news: inexplicably, an eyewitness has identified you at the scene of the robbery, and the case against your friends seems airtight.  She believes you have a strong defense \u2013 you have an alibi. The strength of this alibi, however depends heavily on your credibility at trial. She warns you that first degree robbery in New Jersey carries a presumptive sentence of <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/advance.lexis.com\/document\/documentlink\/?pdmfid=1000516&amp;crid=b95f701c-0179-42be-bbf5-de0715ebac0f&amp;action=linkdoc&amp;pdcomponentid=&amp;pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fstatutes-legislation%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A5F0Y-BNR1-6F13-04V4-00000-00&amp;pdtocnodeidentifier=AAEAADAACAAU&amp;ecomp=499fk&amp;prid=5e55d81a-a688-455e-9288-ba87c49fff39\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">fifteen years<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">, with a minimum sentence of <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/advance.lexis.com\/document\/documentlink\/?pdmfid=1000516&amp;crid=b95f701c-0179-42be-bbf5-de0715ebac0f&amp;action=linkdoc&amp;pdcomponentid=&amp;pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fstatutes-legislation%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A5F0Y-BNR1-6F13-04V4-00000-00&amp;pdtocnodeidentifier=AAEAADAACAAU&amp;ecomp=499fk&amp;prid=5e55d81a-a688-455e-9288-ba87c49fff39\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">ten years<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">, and you have to serve 85% of the sentence to be eligible for <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/advance.lexis.com\/search\/practicepagesearch\/?pdmfid=1000516&amp;crid=3b89e3a4-6fa1-44bb-869d-72e0df28ad72&amp;pdstartin=hlct%3A1%3A1&amp;pdtypeofsearch=searchboxclick&amp;pdsearchterms=N.J.S.A.+2C%3A43-7.2(a)&amp;pdsearchtype=SearchBox&amp;pdqttype=and&amp;pdpsf=&amp;ecomp=ht5hk&amp;earg=pdpsf&amp;prid=e2e7919a-c4ec-4d27-8fa7-f4ebce152679\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">parole<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">. But, there\u2019s a bright side. \u2013The prosecutor recognizes that there\u2019s a possibility you weren\u2019t an accomplice, so he\u2019s willing to offer you a plea bargain: a two year sentence in exchange for your testimony against your friends.<\/span>\n\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Rationally speaking, unless you are almost certain to win at trial, your expected value of defending yourself is less than the plea bargain you\u2019ve been offered. Unless there\u2019s only a thirteen percent chance of conviction (2\/15 = 13.3) or less, taking the two year option is the best choice. Moreover, while a two year term in jail will ruin two years of your life, a fifteen year sentence could mean that you miss your twenties, are out of society for years, and are likely to become \u2018institutionalized\u2019 \u2013 meaning you\u2019ve become so accustomed to jail that you can no longer function outside of it. You take the deal.<\/span>\n\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400\">How frequently situations like that occur is up for debate. The Fourth Amendment requires that there be probable cause in order to indict someone, and many people who are indicted are not, as the hypothetical above presumed, innocent. But clearly many people who are indicted are innocent, or, though guilty of something, are not guilty of the crime charged. Faced with a potentially life ruining sentence, however, many people are compelled to take a plea that does not reflect the strength of the evidence against them. Clearly, that\u2019s not a good result. <\/span>\n\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Before New Jersey underwent sentencing reform in the late <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/sentencing.typepad.com\/sentencing_law_and_policy\/files\/nj_statutory_changes_to_sentencing_2.pdf.\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">70s and early 80s<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">, a first degree robbery charge would have been subject to considerable judicial discretion, and likely would have resulted in a considerably lighter sentence. The result of the sentencing reforms in New Jersey has been an increase in punishment: of 112 legislative changes in sentencing from 1979 to 2007, exactly zero involved reductions in punishment, while 50 upgraded crimes to higher sentencing structures, 39 imposed mandatory minimums, and 14 created <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/sentencing.typepad.com\/sentencing_law_and_policy\/files\/nj_statutory_changes_to_sentencing_2.pdf.\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">an extended term provision<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">. New Jersey is far from alone in that regard \u2013 most states enacted sentencing reform in the 70s and 80s that severely increased the jail term for <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.criminaljustice.ny.gov\/pio\/csr_report2-2009.pdf\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">crimes<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">. This reform tracks an explosion in the prison population from 200,000 adults in 1973 to 2.4 million adults <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/news\/wonk\/wp\/2014\/04\/30\/the-meteoric-costly-and-unprecedented-rise-of-incarceration-in-america\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">in 2015<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">. The total amount of people institutionalized in the criminal justice system via probation, parole, jail, and prison <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/news\/wonk\/wp\/2014\/04\/30\/the-meteoric-costly-and-unprecedented-rise-of-incarceration-in-america\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">exceeds seven million<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">. <\/span>\n\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400\">These sentencing reform regimes have positive sides. Plea bargains help prosecutors by giving them a means of extracting testimony against co-conspirators and accomplices. Higher sentences give prosecutors a heavier club with which they can threaten possible criminals into spilling the beans. They also play a vital role in the functioning of the criminal justice system, since pleas clear up court congestion, and higher sentences incentivize pleas. Further, some have argued that longer sentences serve to deter crime, though it\u2019s not clear that that is the case. Historically speaking, however, it\u2019s undeniable that crime rates have dropped precipitously in <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/www.bjs.gov\/ucrdata\/Search\/Crime\/State\/RunCrimeStatebyState.cfm\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">the last twenty years<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">. Perhaps the most obvious benefit of extended sentences is that dangerous criminals are kept off the streets longer. But the negative side, however, is that the United States now has the largest incarcerated population in the world, and that number has continued to grow. <\/span>\n\n<span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Reform is on the horizon, though primarily through the vehicle of drug sentencing. The Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act recently approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee proposes to reduce sentences for drug <\/span><a href=\"http:\/\/famm.org\/senate-judiciary-committee-approves-the-sentencing-reform-and-corrections-act\/\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">crimes<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">, and several public figures, including <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=FlLjKS0s9fU\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">President Obama<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\"> and New Jersey\u2019s Governor <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=FdYMx7sycW4\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">Chris Christie<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">, have both spoken about the need for change in how the criminal justice system treats drug crimes. But these reforms are guided more by the realization that drug use isn\u2019t necessarily something that needs to be criminalized, than that sentencing reform is necessary in general. Furthermore, there\u2019s reason to believe that these reforms will have little impact on the overcrowdedness of the criminal justice system. Drug offenders only constitute around 20% of the <\/span><a href=\"https:\/\/www.themarshallproject.org\/2015\/03\/04\/how-to-cut-the-prison-population-by-50-percent\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">prison population<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400\">. Finally, adjusting sentencing in drug cases alone will have no impact on the Sophie\u2019s choice faced by those charged for a crime they didn\u2019t commit, but that carries a long prison sentence.<\/span>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Suppose two of your friends drive over to your house in New Jersey and pick you up for, what you believe, is a night on the town. As their car is pulling out of your driveway, two police cars pull up, sirens blaring, and the officers jump out, weapons drawn. You are arrested and charged&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1949,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18,19,27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2039","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-feature","category-feature-img","category-recent-stories"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2039","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2039"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2039\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1949"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2039"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2039"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/publications.lawschool.cornell.edu\/jlpp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2039"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}