concessions in order to obtain some type of conviction. Cases with less gravity are more inclined to plead because of lower sentences including probation. Cases with greater sentences react to the guaranteed range of sentence set by the plea agreement or the judge. In other words, cases that have a high sentence are more likely to plead when a lower sentence is guaranteed. In simple terms, defendants are generally pragmatists. They want to know if they will get less time by pleading guilty than if they go to trial. If the answer is yes then they are more likely to plead than they are if they are offered nothing.

On the other hand, if there are no courtrooms available, judges must show more sentencing flexibility because these cases have to be tried or resolved before statutory or constitutional time limits have expired. Defense attorneys know that and so do prosecutors. Therefore, when there are courtrooms available, judges will generally set tougher terms than when they have no courtroom.

The existence of longer sentences and the ability to work within that range of sentences gives greater leverage to prosecutors to obtain pleas than they had prior to Three Strikes. This is because the Three Strikes Law significantly raises the consequences of going to trial as opposed to pleading.

To the argument that it gives prosecutors too much/too little discretion. I have heard this claim made both ways. Let me respond one way. Prosecutors are the individuals given the public responsibility to ensure justice is pursued. It is their job to make sure the community is safe and the public gives them discretion to exercise their judgment. I don't think as a matter of policy the public would understand or agree with the idea of defendants who have serious and violent records not getting long-term prison commitments when they commit a new felony. Three Strikes was a policy determination that was intended to ensure as much as possible that such a public policy position was enforced.

As a former prosecutor and long-time trial and appellate judge, I believe that it is appropriate to try to equalize the treatment of defendants throughout California. The

Next Page
or go to... 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20
21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39
40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48