Plea Bargaining - Research Paper Example

622 (2002), (Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the ninth circuit No. 01-595. Argued April 24, 2002-Decided June 24, 2002) the court initiated the focus on the realities of the plea process but the endeavor materialized with a half hearted outcome. It was in the year 2010, regarding a case between Padilla v. Kentucky - 08-651 (2010) the court engineered in the substantive calculus of the notion of plea bargaining along with the attendants sentencing decisions, running of the lawyers along with the associated civil consequences.

Padilla was a petitioner, a lawful permanent resident of the United States for 40 years faced deportation after pleading guilty to drug distribution charges in Kentucky. Padilla held that before a guilty plea, the criminal defense counsel must be advising the clients not only about the direct consequences of the plea but also but also about one of its chief collateral civil consequences, deportation. The case of Padilla can be said to be a landmark construal of the constitution’s Sixth Amendment’s right to effective counsel followed by the court to move beyond its fixation upon various cases that go to the jury trials (Bibas, 2011, p.1117). The United States (U.S.) of America from a very long time has been rigidly associated with the emblem of democracy and freedom with proper and quick functioning of the court system being one of the major parameters.

Within the judicial system of the United States, the notion of plea bargaining is highly common with approximately 90% of the criminal cases being settled by plea bargaining mechanism rather than by the process of a jury trials. The procedure of plea bargaining is subjected to the court and several states and jurisdictions fall under domain of different rules (Plea Bargaining, 2012). The American Samoa is one of the territories of United States of America and the central theme of the paper will be dealing with the practice of plea bargaining