Voluntary, knowing, and intelligent pleas: Understanding the plea inquiry.

Redlich, Allison D.; Summers, Alicia

doi:10.1037/a0026066

Cited by 31 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, addressing the scant existing research at the intersection of plea bargaining and gender, Jones () conducted interviews with female prisoners to ascertain whether women might experience unique pressure to (falsely) plead guilty as compared to men – indeed, he concluded that factors such as amplified coercion and family responsibilities might make women more inclined to plead guilty to crimes they did not commit. Other researchers in our field have at least mentioned that women are more inclined to accept plea deals than men (e.g., Redlich & Summers, ), although it certainly does not appear that any other researchers to date have experimentally examined the impacts of defendant sex on plea decisions. Ultimately, we cannot rule out the potential that other (unmeasured) factors might also have contributed to the differences we observed between men and women, and we recommend further experimental research to uncover whether sex differences in guilty pleas are robust and what the underlying mechanisms are.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting false guilty pleas in a mock plea bargaining scenario

Zimmerman

Hunter

2017

Legal Criminol Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose We sought to investigate key factors that legal scholars believe are contributing to false guilty pleas. Methods Undergraduates playing the role of an innocent defendant in a plea bargaining scenario (N = 382) were randomly assigned to condition in a 2 (trial penalty: mandatory minimum of 10 years, judicial discretion of 4–6 years) × 3 (likelihood of conviction: 10%, 50%, 90%), × 2 (attorney recommendation: take the plea deal, use best judgement) between‐subjects design – false guilty pleas (2 years in prison) were the primary dependent variable. Results Participants faced with a mandatory minimum were more likely to falsely plead guilty, and this effect was mediated by perceptions that life would be more difficult serving the sentence associated with losing at trial compared to that of the plea. Participants given a 90% likelihood of conviction at trial were more likely to falsely plead guilty than those in the 50% and 10% conditions, and this effect was mediated by perceptions of case strength. Finally, female participants (via increased perceptions of case strength) were more likely to falsely plead guilty than male participants. Contrary to our predictions, attorney recommendation did not impact false guilty pleas, perhaps due to the absence of a proper social influence component to the manipulation. Conclusions Overall, the findings provide evidence supporting the apparent causal mechanisms underlying the ‘innocence problem’ in plea bargaining, and we discuss future directions for plea bargaining research pertaining to both research questions and methodology.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting false guilty pleas in a mock plea bargaining scenario

Zimmerman

Hunter

2017

Legal Criminol Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Time pressures and temporal discounting likely exacerbate the potential for erroneous pleas. Given that individuals’ decision-making abilities are generally subject to temporal discounting (Daftary-Kapur & Zottoli, 2014; Edkins & Dervan, 2018) and are compromised under time pressures (Starcke & Brand, 2012), it is not surprising that psychologists have linked time pressures to coercive plea deals (Redlich, Bibas, Edkins, & Madon, 2017; Redlich & Shteynberg, 2016; Redlich & Summers, 2012). Thus, the fast-paced nature of detainees’ pleas might translate into elevated wrongful conviction rates among this group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Detainees Plead Guilty Faster? A Survival Analysis of Pretrial Detention and the Timing of Guilty Pleas

Petersen

2019

Criminal Justice Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although numerous quantitative studies have linked pretrial detention to increased conviction rates, the precise mechanisms linking these decisions remain unclear. Qualitative studies shed light on these processes, revealing that many detainees plead guilty quickly to escape the pains of detention, including poor confinement conditions, strained work or family relations, and “dead time.” Moreover, these pressures to plead are often exacerbated by uncertain detention length, time-sensitive “exploding” plea deals, and temporal discounting. Utilizing data on felony defendants from large urban counties between 1990 and 2004, we assess whether pretrial detention accelerates the pace of guilty pleas. Survival analyses indicate that pretrial detainees plead guilty 2.86 times faster than released defendants do, suggesting that pretrial detention is a powerful prosecutorial tool. Moreover, local resources affect case processing time in ways that are consistent with the courtroom workgroup perspective. Implications for public policies and future research are discussed.

show abstract

“…As with the issues relating to informational deficits, concerns about the voluntariness of guilty pleas predate COVID-19 (Redlich & Summers, 2012). According to Brady v. United States (1970), a voluntary plea is one that has not been induced by threats, misrepresentations or improper promises (e.g., bribes).…”

Section: Validity Of Guilty Pleasmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 exacerbates existing system factors that disadvantage defendants: Findings from a national survey of defense attorneys.

Daftary‐Kapur

Henderson

Zottoli

2021

Law and Human Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: COVID-19 has impacted many facets of daily life and the legal system is no exception. Legal scholars have hypothesized that the effects of the pandemic may contribute to more coercive plea bargains (Cannon, 2020;Johnson, 2020). In this study, we explored defense attorneys' perceptions of whether and how the plea process has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Hypotheses: This study was exploratory, and we made no a priori hypotheses. Method: We surveyed 93 practicing United States defense attorneys about their perceptions of whether and how the pandemic has affected court procedures, plea-bargaining and prosecutorial behavior, and defendant decision-making. We conducted semistructured follow-up interviews with 13 defense attorneys to help contextualize the survey responses. Results: The majority of defense attorneys (81%, n = 76) reported that the plea process had changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that they experienced difficulty contacting and communicating with their clients, especially those who were detained. Two thirds of defense attorneys (n = 42) who said the plea process had changed thought that prosecutors were offering more lenient deals. One third of defense attorneys with detained clients (n = 23) reported having had clients plead guilty due to COVID-19 related conditions who might not have under normal circumstances. Conclusions: The majority of defense attorneys reported that the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted their ability to access and advise clients, and they believed that leverage in plea negotiations had shifted further to individual prosecutors. At the same time, the attorneys reported that prosecutors were offering more lenient deals, painting a complex picture of the plea negotiation process during the pandemic. Public Significance StatementOur finding suggest that responses designed to mitigate the effects of COVID-19, such as court closures and virtual hearings, may adversely impact attorney client-communication and the fairness of the plea process for defendants. Courts should closely monitor whether and how accommodations implemented to maintain safe operations might affect defendants' access to legal advice and the validity of their guilty pleas.

show abstract

Voluntary, knowing, and intelligent pleas: Understanding the plea inquiry.

Cited by 31 publications

References 31 publications

Factors affecting false guilty pleas in a mock plea bargaining scenario

Factors affecting false guilty pleas in a mock plea bargaining scenario

Do Detainees Plead Guilty Faster? A Survival Analysis of Pretrial Detention and the Timing of Guilty Pleas

COVID-19 exacerbates existing system factors that disadvantage defendants: Findings from a national survey of defense attorneys.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About