Refinement of Plea Bargain Agreement in California Supreme Court

Last Modified: October 14, 2020
April 18, 2013 | Rabin Nabizadeh | Identity Theft

Usually, plea bargaining is the purview of prosecutors in criminal cases, but recently the California Supreme Court has unanimously determined that judges may inform defendants of their possible sentence if they plead guilty to the charges against them.  This dangerous precedent has caused quite a stir in the state and has  completely re-defined the roles of judges and attorneys.  A balance is meant to exist between the court’s representative, the judge, and the attorneys dealing with the case.  Normally, judges are meant to be impartial, upholding the law that already exists – not creating new laws or acting as lawyers do.

The case that set fire to this new debate over whether judicial plea-bargaining (which would be crossing the line) is the same as informing criminal defendants of their “indicated sentence” involved a man named Wesley Clancey, who was arrested n 2010 for forging checks more than $123,000  in Santa Clara County.  Because Clancey had already been convicted in the past of a felony, the prosecutor in the case argued for an 8-9 year prison term.  However, Judge Rene Navarro told Clancey something entirely different – that he planned to give him 5 years instead of 8-9 because the conviction was more than 10 years old.  In the end, Clancey got the 5 years, partly because he pleaded no contest to the charges as per Judge Navarro’s comments (see People vs. Clancey, S200158).

While some see this incredible change as positive, allowing the court to spend less time on particular cases in which the defendant admits guilt, other see this as an overwhelming blow to the legitimacy of prosecutorial power and authority.  The truth of the matter is, however, that prosecutors are often overzealous in their sentencing requests.  And judges?  Well, let’s just say that they are likely to have a great deal more experience and knowledge than the average prosecutor.  Now, when it seems that the prosecution is being unreasonable, a California judge can adjust and control for this factor, making the judicial process run more smoothly and saving the tax payers of the state the money for unnecessary trials.

latest news

February 27, 2024
What to Do if You’ve Been Arrested for a DUI in San Jose
Being arrested for a DUI in San Jose, CA, can have severe penalties, potentially resulting in jail time, losing your driver's license, and other serious consequences. Here's what to do if facing a DUI conviction after being accused of driving over the legal limit and how a California DUI lawyer can help you resolve your case with [...]
February 25, 2024
What Happens When You Get a DUI?
Getting a DUI (Driving Under the Influence) can be a stressful and life-changing event. It starts the moment a law enforcement officer suspects you've been drinking and driving. This can lead to being pulled over, undergoing a field sobriety test, and possibly being arrested. The consequences of a DUI arrest include legal action, potential jail [...]
February 6, 2024
What Can I Expect After Being Arrested for a DUI in San Jose?

Getting arrested for a DUI in San Jose can be a stressful and confusing experience. You might have many questions about what happens next and what you should do. Knowing the process and what to expect can help you navigate this challenging situation. It’s important to remember that a DUI arrest is severe, and the […]