Plea Bargaining: Its Effect on Sentencing and Convictions in the District of Columbia

Abstract

bargaining-the process by which the state grants sentencing and other concessions in exchange for guilty pleas in criminal cases-is frequently paramount in this concern for crime control and justice. Yet despite the general recognition of the importance of plea bargaining to American jurisprudence, disagreement persists about what plea bargaining should accomplish given prevailing norms of justice, what plea bargaining actually does accomplish given the reality of the judicial process, and how the existing practice could be modified (or preserved) through public policy. Research reported in this study addresses these concerns by posing and answering a broad question: Who gains and who loses from plea bargaining? Based on data contained in the Prosecutor's Management Information System (PROMIS) maintained by the United States Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C., the analysis is essentially empirical, and the attempt to quantify observations and support conclusions statistically contrasts with an equally important existing body of research, which is more qualitative.