[17] Therefore, Black's.
characterization of the exchange involved in plea bargaining understates the diversity of concessions offered by the state in.
exchange for the defendant's guilty plea.
To really consider the core concerns of plea bargaining critics, the definition of plea bargaining must encompass the broad range of.
practices that constitute plea bargaining today. A comprehensive definition defines plea bargaining as "the defendant's agreement.
to plead guilty to a criminal charge with the reasonable expectation of receiving some consideration from the state."[18] This.
definition encompasses both explicit plea bargaining and implicit plea bargaining. Although some practitioners refuse to.
acknowledge implicit bargaining as part of the practice,[19] its use as a method of negotiating a guilty plea qualifies it as part of the.
process of plea bargaining. In considering whether jurisdictions should ban or severely restrict plea bargaining, the comprehensive.
definition should be used to avoid confusion.
The transformation of the criminal justice system over the course of the nineteenth century[42] provides a forceful explanation for.
the emergence of plea bargaining.[43] At common law, the "[j]ury trial was a summary proceeding,"[44] conducted by private.
individuals or sheriffs. Although most states had established a system of public prosecution by 1789, the public prosecutor was.
primarily considered to be acting as a part of the judicial process.[45] The framers of the Constitution laid the foundations of an.
adversarial justice system in the new republic,[46] but the operation of that system differed significantly from today's system. "Not.
much is known about the day-to-day work of the courtroom in . . . 1800";[47] however, the absence of certain features in the.
system can be deduced from the adoption of those features through statute or case law.[48] During the early part of the.
nineteenth century, many criminal prosecutions occurred without lawyers for the defendant, the prosecution, or both.
