Plea bargaining is part of the fabric of the functioning of the criminal justice system. But with a few notable decisions, the United States Supreme Court has issued few decisions regulating the practice. That changed this term. In the first opinion, Missouri v. Frye, the Court vacated the decision of the Court of Appeals of Missouri and remanded the case for further proceedings. By a vote of five to four, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel extends to the consideration of plea offers that lapse or are rejected and that that right applies to “all ‘critical’ stages of the criminal proceedings.” Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Thomas and Alito.
In the second opinion regarding ineffective assistance of counsel at the plea bargain stage, Lafler v. Cooper the Court vacated the decision of the Sixth Circuit and remanded the case for further proceedings. Also by a vote of five to four, the Court held that where counsel’s ineffective advice led to an offer’s rejection, and where the prejudice alleged is having to stand trial, a defendant must show that but for the ineffective advice, there is a reasonable probability that the plea offer would have been presented to the court, that the court would have accepted its terms, and that the conviction or sentence, or both, under the offer’s terms would have been less severe than under the actual judgment and sentence imposed. Justice Scalia filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Thomas joined and in which Chief Justice Roberts joined as to all but Part IV. Justice Alito also filed a dissenting opinion.
Judge Kevin Burke provides an excellent exegesis of two US Supreme Court decisions, but his first sentence might imply plea bargaining is a pragmatic practice that saves scarce time and resources. This possible implication eclipes the fact that a defendant’s pretrial constituional rights move the adverszry system to the negotiation between opposing counsel prior to trial. Plea bargaining is not the twilight of the adversary system, but it is a reflection of the defendant’s strength prior to any trial. When trials were held every where and all the time, defendants did not even right a right to counsel. Therefore, today’s plea bargaining is something more than a function being performed for the pupose of saving time and money.
LikeLike