Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2268702
 


 



Taming Negotiated Justice


Stephanos Bibas


University of Pennsylvania Law School

2012

Yale Law Journal Online, Vol. 122, Pg. 35, 2012
U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 13-10

Abstract:     
After four decades of neglecting laissez-faire plea bargaining, the Supreme Court got it right. In Missouri v. Frye and Lafler v. Cooper, the Court recognized that the Sixth Amendment regulates plea bargaining. Thus, the Court held that criminal defendants can challenge deficient advice that causes them to reject favorable plea bargains and receive heavier sentences after trial. Finally, the Court has brought law to the shadowy plea-bargaining bazaar.

Writing in dissent, Justice Scalia argued that the majority’s opinion “opens a whole new boutique of constitutional jurisprudence (‘plea-bargaining law’).” To which I say: it is about time the Court developed some plea-bargaining law. Justice Scalia’s objections might have carried more force half a century ago, before the Court itself blessed plea bargaining as a speedy, efficient way to clear congested dockets. But, having made jury trials too slow and intricate to function in all cases, the Court has long since given up on preserving trials as the norm. In a world where nineteen out of every twenty adjudicated criminal cases ends in a guilty plea, plea-bargaining law is hardly a “boutique” corner of criminal procedure; it should be central. Since even Justice Scalia countenances plea bargaining as a “necessary evil,” it behooves us to regulate that evil. For the Sixth Amendment to remain meaningful in the real world of guilty pleas, the Court must translate its guarantee of assistance of counsel to apply to plea bargains and the sentences set by those bargains.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 5

Keywords: Justice Antonin Scalia, criminal law and procedure, plea bargaining, Sixth Amendment, ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial discretion, Supreme Court of the United States, sentencing guidelines

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: May 23, 2013  

Suggested Citation

Bibas, Stephanos, Taming Negotiated Justice (2012). Yale Law Journal Online, Vol. 122, Pg. 35, 2012; U of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 13-10. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2268702

Contact Information

Stephanos Bibas (Contact Author)
University of Pennsylvania Law School ( email )
3501 Sansom Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States
215-746-2297 (Phone)
HOME PAGE: http://www.law.upenn.edu/cf/faculty/sbibas/
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 139
Downloads: 27

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.219 seconds