How Plea Agreements Work in New Jersey Criminal Cases

How Plea Agreements Work in New Jersey Criminal Cases

Plea bargaining is a very common practice in New Jersey criminal cases. Over 90% of criminal cases in New Jersey are resolved through plea agreements rather than going to trial. Plea agreements allow defendants to plead guilty to some charges in exchange for concessions from prosecutors, such as dismissing other charges or recommending a more lenient sentence.

The Basics of Plea Bargaining

In a plea agreement, the prosecutor and defense attorney negotiate the specific terms of the deal. This usually involves the defendant agreeing to plead guilty to fewer or less serious charges in exchange for a more lenient sentence.

For example, a defendant charged with armed robbery may agree to plead guilty to simple robbery. The armed robbery charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years in prison. But the simple robbery charge has no mandatory minimum and a sentencing range of 5-10 years. So pleading down to simple robbery exposes the defendant to less potential prison time.

The prosecutor may also agree to dismiss other related charges entirely as part of the plea deal. This avoids the risk of consecutive sentences if convicted on multiple counts after trial.

In addition to reduced charges, the plea agreement may specify a recommended sentence or sentencing range. In New Jersey, the prosecutor can agree to recommend a certain prison term to the judge as part of the negotiations. The judge still makes the final sentencing decision but often defers to the prosecutor’s recommendation.

Why Defendants Accept Plea Deals

There are several reasons why a defendant may choose to accept a plea offer rather than go to trial:

• Avoid the maximum sentence – Plea deals provide certainty of a more lenient sentence compared to the risk of the maximum if convicted at trial.
• Save time and money – Trials are time-consuming and expensive. Plea deals resolve the case quickly.
• Avoid immigration consequences – Pleading guilty to fewer/less serious charges can sometimes avoid deportation.
• Protect privacy – Pleading guilty avoids a public trial and scrutiny. This can be appealing for high-profile defendants.

However, defendants should never accept a plea deal without discussing potential defenses with their attorney. In some cases, the evidence may be weak and taking it to trial is better strategically.

The Plea Hearing

If the defendant accepts the plea offer, the next step is the plea hearing. This is a court proceeding where the judge questions the defendant about the plea agreement to ensure it is knowing and voluntary.

The judge will ask the defendant if they understand the rights they are giving up by pleading guilty, such as the right to trial and to confront witnesses. The judge will also confirm the defendant is pleading guilty because they are in fact guilty and not just because of the plea offer.

The prosecutor will provide a factual basis for the guilty plea by summarizing the evidence against the defendant. The judge must be satisfied there is a sufficient factual basis for the guilty pleas before accepting them.

If the plea is accepted, the judge will schedule sentencing for a later date. The judge orders a presentence report to help determine the appropriate sentence.

The Role of the Judge in Plea Agreements

It is important to understand that the judge is not bound by any sentencing recommendations or agreements made by the prosecutor. The judge has the final say on what sentence will be imposed.

However, in practice most judges accept the terms of a negotiated plea agreement if they feel the sentence is reasonable. Judges want to encourage plea bargaining to resolve cases efficiently.

But there are times when a judge may reject the plea agreement and refuse to be bound by sentencing recommendations. This usually happens if the judge feels the recommended sentence is too lenient given the circumstances.

If the judge rejects the plea deal altogether, the defendant can withdraw the guilty plea and proceed to trial.

Collateral Consequences of Pleading Guilty

When considering a plea bargain, it is critical that defendants understand all potential collateral consequences of pleading guilty. These can include:

• Immigration consequences – Pleading guilty to certain crimes can result in deportation for non-citizen defendants.
• Loss of employment – Some convictions require loss of certain professional licenses.
• Ineligibility for public housing – Federally subsidized housing can deny applicants with certain criminal records.
• Loss of voting rights – Convicted felons lose their right to vote in New Jersey until sentence completion.

A criminal defense attorney can advise the defendant on any collateral consequences so they can make an informed decision on whether to accept the plea offer.

Plea Bargaining Strategies for Defense Attorneys

Plea negotiations are a key part of a defense attorney’s strategy in a criminal case. Effective plea bargaining involves:

• Leveraging weaknesses in the prosecutor’s case – Any holes or potential suppression issues can be used as leverage.
• Highlighting excessive charges – Overcharging by prosecutors provides room for bargaining.
• Appealing to prosecutorial priorities – Some prosecutors care about conviction rates or saving resources.
• Getting creative with alternatives to incarceration – Treatment programs, home confinement, probation etc.
• Utilizing pre-trial interventions – Diversionary programs like Drug Court avoid convictions.
• Coordinating with immigration counsel – Ensure plea consequences are clear.

The defense presents these considerations to the prosecutor in advocating for a favorable deal for their client. But ultimately the prosecutor decides whether to offer a plea bargain or not.

Plea Bargaining from the Prosecutor’s Perspective

Prosecutors consider various factors when deciding whether to offer a plea bargain:

• Strength of evidence – Strong cases may not warrant a deal. Weak cases incentivize deals.
• Seriousness of charges – More willingness to bargain on less serious charges.
• Defendant’s criminal history – First-time offenders often get better deals.
• Wishes of victim – Victim input is considered.
• Resource constraints – Heavy caseloads necessitate resolving cases through pleas.
• Possibility of an appeal – Avoiding appeals motivates plea deals.
• Cooperation against co-defendants – Valuable cooperation may warrant a generous deal.

There are often criticisms that prosecutors have too much power in the plea bargain process. But prosecutors defend it as an efficient means of achieving justice.

Plea Bargaining for Juvenile Cases

Many of the same principles and processes of plea bargaining apply in juvenile delinquency cases. But there are some key differences, including:

• No jury trials – Juvenile cases are bench trials so no jury to avoid.
• Focus on rehabilitation – Sentencing emphasizes treatment over punishment.
• Sealing of juvenile records – Pleas can avoid permanent criminal record.
• Avoiding waiver to adult court – Pleas keep case in juvenile system.

Still, legal safeguards exist to protect juveniles from unwarranted pleas. Consultation with counsel is critical.

Controversies and Criticisms of Plea Bargaining

While plea bargaining is an entrenched feature of our criminal justice system, it is not without controversy. Some common criticisms include:

• Coercion of defendants – Deals may be too good to pass up, forcing involuntary pleas.
• Lack of transparency – Deals are struck in private, obscuring prosecutor motivations.
• Trial penalty – Pleading guilty earns sentencing leniency compared to trial convictions.
• Disparity in outcomes – Deals may vary widely between similar cases.
• Innocents pleading guilty – Risk of innocent people pleading guilty to avoid harsh potential sentences.
• Usurping judges’ authority – Plea deals infringe on judges’ sentencing role.

Despite these concerns, plea bargaining remains firmly established as the primary means of resolving most criminal cases. But there are some reform efforts underway to improve the transparency and fairness of the system.

Conclusion

Plea bargaining is a complex process that requires strategic negotiations between prosecutors and defense attorneys to reach deals beneficial for their clients. While the judge has ultimate authority at sentencing, plea agreements are the method by which over 90% of criminal cases are resolved in New Jersey and nationwide. Defendants should fully understand all implications before accepting a deal. But when used properly, plea bargains can efficiently deliver justice and fair outcomes for all parties involved.