Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=557063
 


 



How Do You Plead, Guilty or Not Guilty?: Does the Plea Inquiry Violate the Defendant's Right to Silence?


Robert F. Cochran Jr.


Pepperdine University School of Law

2005

Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2005

Abstract:     
Early in every criminal case, the trial judge or magistrate asks the defendant a question which probably violates the defendant's right to silence: "How do you plead, guilty or not guilty?" The defendant confronts the "cruel trilemma," often condemned by the Supreme Court, of lying, confession, or silence in a situation where silence implies guilt. The plea inquiry raises all of the problems that have led the Court to prohibit questioning in other contexts. It interferes with the defendant's dignity, autonomy, and privacy. It is inconsistent with the adversary system, implying that the defendant has a responsibility to establish his innocence. The plea inquiry is a remnant of a day when England had many elements of an inquisitorial system.

Of course, the common practice is for defense attorneys to instruct defendants to plead "not guilty" at the plea inquiry, irrespective of their guilt. This practice has deep roots in English history and it probably has enabled courts to avoid dealing with the constitutional problems of the plea inquiry. But the "remedy" to the plea inquiry's constitutional problems has its own problems. The false "not guilty" plea unnecessarily alienates the defendant from the victim and the public, reinforces any inclination the defendant might have had to lie, reinforces a tendency on the part of lawyers to assist clients in lying, and adds to the cynicism which lawyers, clients, and the public feel toward the criminal justice system. This practice merely steers the defendant toward one of the trilemma's "cruel" options-lying. The constitutional, social, and moral problems of the plea inquiry might be worth it if it served a significant purpose, but it does not. All the plea inquiry does is signal whether the defendant will take his trial or not. Rather than pose the current plea inquiry, courts could ask the defendant whether he will plead "guilty" or take his trial or, in the alternative, courts could merely assume that the defendant will take his trial, in the absence of a defendant motion to the contrary.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 49

Keywords: criminal, guilty, plea, defendant, right to silence

JEL Classification: K14

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: June 21, 2004 ; Last revised: October 23, 2008

Suggested Citation

Cochran, Robert F., How Do You Plead, Guilty or Not Guilty?: Does the Plea Inquiry Violate the Defendant's Right to Silence? (2005). Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 26, No. 4, 2005. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=557063 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.557063

Contact Information

Robert F. Cochran Jr. (Contact Author)
Pepperdine University School of Law ( email )
24255 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90263
United States
310-456-4684 (Phone)
310-456-4063 (Fax)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 8,268
Downloads: 207
Download Rank: 88,218

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.250 seconds