Plea bargaining recommendations by criminal defense attorneys: evidence strength, potential sentence, and defendant preference

Abstract

Although most criminal cases are disposed of through the process of plea bargaining, little research has focused on this process, and that research has focused on two variables: probability of conviction and potential sentence. This study examined the plea bargaining process from the perspective of the criminal defense attorney and expands prior research by including a third variable: defendant preference regarding plea. Attorney participants (N = 186) responded to a survey containing a vignette presented in a 2 x 2 x 2 between-subjects design, in which there was systematic manipulation of the following three variables in the context of criminal litigation: likelihood of conviction based on the strength of evidence, defendant preference regarding plea, and potential sentence if convicted. All of these variables were considered important to criminal defense attorneys, and how these variables significantly interacted with each other is explained. We discuss these findings in light of past research and theory that suggested attorneys make plea recommendations according only to probability of conviction and potential sentence, and we discuss implications and directions for future research.

An Explicit Test of Plea Bargaining in the “Shadow of the Trial”

“…There have been two partial replications of the Rossman, McDonald, and Cramer () hypothetical plea simulation design (Kramer, Wolbransky, and Heilbrun, ; McAllister and Bregman, ) . Both studies found that defense attorneys were more likely to advise a plea when cases were stronger, and McAllister and Bregman () found that prosecutors were less willing to plea bargain when cases were strong.…”

Les rapports de force lors des négociations des plaidoyers de culpabilité. Analyse du point de vue des avocats de la défense

“…La plupart des recherches s'accordent pour dire que la force de la preuve est un élément déterminant dans la décision d'entamer des négociations ou de plaider coupable, car elle permet d'estimer les probabilités de condamnation en cas de procès (Kramer, Wolbransky et Heilbrun, 2007). Frenzel et Ball (2007) montrent ensuite que la classe et le type d'infraction sont généralement les meilleurs prédicteurs de la décision de plaider coupable : il y a plus de plaidoyers de culpabilité pour les infractions les plus graves, ainsi que pour celles contre la drogue et la propriété.…”

Attorney Views on the Use of Private Agencies for Probation Supervision and Treatment

“…No study has been conducted to measure how attorneys view PSPs. A review of the available literature reflected that attorney perceptions have been previously measured on issues related to the pretrial or trial process, such as suspect lineups, witness credibility, client competence, and plea bargaining (Bonnie, Poythress, Hoge, Monahan, & Eisenberg, 1996;Foot, Stolberg, & Shepherd, 2000;Hoge, Bonnie, Poythress, & Monahan, 1992;Kramer, Wolbransky, & Heilbrun, 2007;Stinson, Devenport, Cutler, & Kravitz, 1996).…”