State-induced guilty pleas and legitimacy

McConville, Mike; Marsh, Luke

doi:10.4337/9781782548928.00009

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It revealed how the structural demands for efficiency can compromise the role and ethical obligations of legal practitioners, who expressed feeling pressure to quickly resolve cases at the expense of other judicial values. These pressures also extend toward defendants within the system, as legal practitioners identified a reliance on “state-induced” guilty pleas to manage the workload (McConville and Marsh, 2014). Insufficient government funding and the “sausage factory” approach to justice were also identified as increasing the risk of inaccuracies and errors throughout the legal process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, critics argue that by actively encouraging defendants to admit guilt, these inducements prioritize efficiency and cost-effectiveness over just and fair outcomes (Johnston and Smith, 2017;Nobles and Schiff, 2019). Inducements to plead are also argued to exert undue pressure on defendants, especially the many vulnerable persons appearing before the courts, thereby increasing the risk of wrongful convictions by coercing both guilty and innocent persons into a guilty plea (Baldwin and McConville, 1977;Flynn and Freiberg, 2018b;Helm, 2019;McConville and Marsh, 2014).…”

Section: Managerialism and The Demand For Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficiency Over Accuracy?: Exploring Front-Line Practitioners’ Experiences and Opinions on the “Guilty Plea System”

Nash,

Dioso-Villa,

Porter

2023

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While most criminal cases are resolved by a guilty plea, little empirical research has examined guilty plea wrongful convictions. This study explored this issue through semistructured interviews with 27 legal professionals in Queensland, Australia ( n = 16 defense lawyers; n = 7 prosecutors; n = 4 magistrates). Driven by a systems and organizational perspective, we conducted a thematic analysis exploring the structural and organizational features that may systematically contribute to erroneous guilty plea convictions. We found an overarching emphasis on efficiency and pressure to quickly resolve cases, coupled with practical constraints impeding legal professionals from ensuring guilty pleas are appropriate and accurate. There was also a general acceptance of false guilty pleas through the justification of “choice,” legitimized by the authoritative precedent set by Meissner v R (1995). The findings indicate the routine nature of erroneous guilty plea convictions and raise important implications regarding the current validity of a guilty plea, as they do not always reflect actual guilt.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Managerialism and The Demand For Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficiency Over Accuracy?: Exploring Front-Line Practitioners’ Experiences and Opinions on the “Guilty Plea System”

Nash,

Dioso-Villa,

Porter

2023

Social & Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7. The extensive use and expansion of the guilty plea discount in recent years may be linked to increased political pressures for bureaucratic and financial constraint; see McConville and Marsh (2014). The International Journal of Evidence & Proof 27(3) According to this view, the state stands accused of failing to provide a representative (i.e., broadly shared) system of values through which to justify punishment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Re-thinking notions of evidence and proof for sentencing: Towards a more communitarian model

Henham

2023

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Judges and magistrates are often criticised for failing to take sufficient account of social factors such as poverty and social deprivation when sentencing offenders. The implication is that the sentencing practices of the courts lack an important social dimension—that of ‘social justice’—namely, the perception that the punishment of criminalised behaviour by the state is fair and non-discriminatory. This article asserts that the notion of ‘social justice’ sits uneasily with the values that sustain the existing paradigm of adversarial trial. It is argued that shifting the focus of the adversarial trial away from its narrow preoccupation with individual accountability towards a more communitarian model of penal accountability would significantly enhance the moral credibility of sentencing and its social impact. A more flexible approach to the admissibility and evaluation of evidence is advocated, one conceived within a communitarian ideology whose purpose is to promote penal interventions which enhance social justice.

show abstract

The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism

Tata

2019

Sentencing: A Social Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State-induced guilty pleas and legitimacy

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Efficiency Over Accuracy?: Exploring Front-Line Practitioners’ Experiences and Opinions on the “Guilty Plea System”

Efficiency Over Accuracy?: Exploring Front-Line Practitioners’ Experiences and Opinions on the “Guilty Plea System”

Re-thinking notions of evidence and proof for sentencing: Towards a more communitarian model

The Work of the Sentencing Professions: Animating Autonomous Individualism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About