The Guilty Plea Cost-Benefit Analysis.

Didn\\\'t Like ItLiked It (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

As defenders, we often have to help people decide whether to plead guilty or proceed to trial.

Sometimes the question can be simplified to this: how does the assured outcome of a plea compare to the accused’s punishment if we do not, multiplied by the proability that we will not?

If the probability of prevailing at trial is 50% and the punishment if the accused loses will be 10, then the accused will rationally accept a plea resulting in punishment of less than 5.

I use numbers without units — “10,” “5″ — for the punishment because factors other than the length of the sentence might affect the severity of the punishment. Different punishments might have subjective costs to an accused that are not directly proportional to the length of the sentence. For example, to an accused who is in very poor health there might not be any perceptible difference between two years in prison and twenty — either might be a death sentence. Similarly, the damage done to an accused’s reputation by the mere fact of a conviction may be so great that the possibility of more jail time is of relatively little importance — a conviction with probation might be a 9 and a year in jail might be a 10. To some accused of capital murder, a death sentence might seem preferable to life in prison with no hope of parole.

Of course, all of this is a clear approximation of what is in reality a vague and fuzzy calculus. Only the accused can make the decision whether to plead guilty or not. The lawyer’s job is to give the accused as much information as possible to allow her to compare the consequences of a plea with the the likely outcome of a trial and make the decision that is best for her. At least one of these numbers — the probability — is generally no better than a guess based on the lawyer’s experience and intuition.

The same is also true in most Texas state cases of the potential punishment after trial. The costs of the various potential punishments can only be determined by the accused, but the lawyer can educate her about the collateral consequences (immigration, employment, and so forth) as well as better explain the direct consequences of any hypothetical outcome.

There is a good argument that other considerations than the self-interest of the accused should enter into the plea / trial decision; I’ll write about that argument soon.

Technorati Tags: ,

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

By submitting a comment here you give me permission to use your words in any way I like, including editing them for clarity, brevity, or content, as well as rearranging the words or the letters within them to change their very meaning. Those who engage in anonymous ad hominem attacks are the car-keyers of the internet, and will not be tolerated. If you engage in such attacks, I may edit the post to show your name or to make it appear that you are attacking yourself. Or both. I don't have to let you comment here. Don't do so for blatant marketing purposes; do so only to add to the discussion. Once you click "submit comment" you have given up all interest in your words to me, and have no further interest in your words. You agree never to sue, grieve, or complain to anyone about the use that I make of the letters you have typed. If you even threaten to do so, you agree that you will be held up to eternal public ridicule.