Abstract
Prosecutors have virtually unfettered discretion in their plea negotiations with defendants. Where discretion is unrestricted, unwarranted disparity is likely to follow. The current study examines the relationship between offender characteristics and count bargaining. From an integrated theory approach (integrating concession and consensus models, liberation hypothesis, and focal concerns theory), the current study hypothesizes that race and ethnicity, sex, age, and employment status of the offender has an effect on count bargaining decisions in only the borderline serious cases. Data were collected on 2,578 guilty pleas in Chicago, Illinois, in 1993 and analyzed using a backwards selection logistic regression analysis partitioning cases by severity of the most serious charge. The results from these analyses indicate that offender characteristics do not have a statistically significant effect on count bargaining. However, there may be important differences masked by straight pleas, symbolic bargaining, and overcharging practices.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
