Show simple item record

"Apprendi" and Plea Bargaining

dc.contributor.authorKing, Nancy J., 1958-
dc.contributor.authorKlein, Susan Riva, 1962-
dc.date.accessioned2014-01-06T20:33:32Z
dc.date.available2014-01-06T20:33:32Z
dc.date.issued2001
dc.identifier.citation54 Stan. L. Rev. 295en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1803/5858
dc.description.abstractBefore "Apprendi", prosecutors using recidivism as a club could, and did, regularly insist that defendants admit aggravating facts as part of the plea or face additional time. When the prosecutor's threats of added time were not persuasive and the proof of aggravating facts weak, the defendant prior to "Apprendi" could refuse to admit to the aggravating fact, and plead guilty only to the offense without the aggravating fact. Nothing about "Apprendi" gives additional leverage to the prosecutor in this situation. A defendant who, prior to "Apprendi", decided to risk trial rather than face the aggravated sentence will make the same decision after "Apprendi". In fact, only one new bargaining chip is created in "Apprendi", and the Court gives it unequivocally to the defendant. By raising the burden of proof, "Apprendi" makes it much more difficult for the prosecutor to prove aggravating facts that trigger longer sentences.en_US
dc.format.extent1 document (17 pages)en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherStanford Law Reviewen_US
dc.subjectApprendi v. New Jerseyen_US
dc.subject.lcshPlea bargaining -- United Statesen_US
dc.subject.lcshAggravating circumstances -- United Statesen_US
dc.subject.lcshSentences (Criminal procedure) -- United Statesen_US
dc.subject.lcshCriminal procedure -- United Statesen_US
dc.title"Apprendi" and Plea Bargainingen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.ssrn-urihttp://ssrn.com/abstract=278842


Files in this item

Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record