(See related pages)
|
|
|
| Plea Bargains and Withholds of Adjudication Shortcut Courtroom Procedures COURT STREET, USA—Fred Smith, an 18-year-old white male, stabbed a good samaritan who tried to break up a fight. He pleaded no contest to aggravated battery. Lucky for Smith, a judge called the attack an "isolated incident" and instead of receiving a felony conviction, he received a "withhold of adjudication." Reginald Wilson, a 16-year-old black male, also stabbed someone during a fight. Wilson, however, wasn't as lucky as Smith and, instead of receiving a withhold, was convicted of a felony and sentenced to 2 years in prison. Neither Smith nor Wilson had prior records. Now, 3 years later, Smith is employed as a supervisor at a video store and is attending Florida International University with the intention of becoming a marine biologist. Wilson has dreams of attending school like Smith. However, college appears to be more of a fantasy than reality. He lives alone in a small, run-down apartment. He has applied for about 50 jobs but is having trouble gaining employment because of his status as a convicted felon. In another community, Jason Frederick struck and killed an elderly woman as she crossed the street; then he drove off. He pleaded "no contest" to leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death. He received a withhold of adjudication and received probation. This means that, in the eyes of the law, he's not a felon and does not lose his civil rights. A man with prior convictions has been arrested for robbery in the first degree, assault, and possession of a deadly weapon. Robbery in the first degree is a serious offense, carrying a penalty of up to 15 years in prison. The defendant's savvy lawyer, who recognizes that the evidence and testimony point to the defendant without a doubt, suggests the defendant "plea bargain"—that is, plead guilty to robbery 3—and tells him he'll be back on the street in 2 years. His lawyer also informs him that if this goes to trial he will probably be convicted and receive 15 years in prison. The defendant agrees and goes off to prison for 18 to 24 months, and the judge, defense attorney, and assistant DA move on to the next case. What is a "withhold of adjudication"? In a case where two people are charged with the exact same crime, why is one person granted a withhold and able to move on with his or her life, while the other person, labeled a convicted felon, struggles with unemployment for the rest of his or her life? Is it fair that a guilty man was able to plea-bargain his way out of a 15-year sentence to a sentence that probably lasted less than 2 years? Do withholds of adjudication and plea bargains corrupt our criminal justice system? Has justice been served? Unquestionably, the processing of criminal cases is not without dramatic moments and characters. There are the many forms of legal magic that combine legislation and judicial interpretation; there are the courtroom wizards who analyze legal axioms and ideals; there are the procedural practitioners who use justice and emotion to influence the outcome of a case; and there is the atmosphere of confusion that sometimes reduces fair-minded legal reasoning to a state of judicial chaos. All of these reflect the melodrama and romanticism of the judicial process. At the same time, there are also the little-known figures who, together with the many other components of the process, represent the backbone of the American court system. This chapter, then, examines the full spectrum of players in the judicial process in order to demonstrate the importance of each to a more unified system of criminal justice. |