Plea Bargaining and Public Opinion in Criminal Justice
This research proposal investigates whether the public supports plea bargaining in cases involving violent and serious crimes, hypothesizing that public opinion is largely opposed to its use in such contexts. Drawing on prior studies — particularly Julian V. Roberts' survey data from Canada and Sergio Herzog's 2003 factorial-survey study from Israel — the proposal outlines a structured survey methodology using eight crime scenarios and multiple independent, dependent, and control variables. The study aims to generate current, empirically grounded data on how demographic factors and crime seriousness shape public attitudes toward plea bargaining, and how those attitudes may influence actual sentencing outcomes.
- Introduction: Defines plea bargaining and states core hypothesis
- Prior Studies on Public Opinion and Plea Bargaining: Reviews Roberts and Herzog survey findings on public attitudes
- Variables for This Study: Outlines six crime categories and four dependent variables
- Plea Bargaining Scenarios: Describes eight scenario dimensions used in the survey
- Independent and Control Variables: Defines independent variables and multivariate regression approach
- Conclusion and Ethical Considerations: Addresses ethical design and study utility
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The proposal clearly anchors its hypothesis in existing empirical literature, citing specific survey findings (Roberts 1997; Herzog 2003) to establish a research foundation before proposing new data collection.
- The methodology section is detailed and transparent, explicitly identifying independent variables, control variables, and the demographic dimensions that will be measured — lending the proposal academic rigor.
- The paper acknowledges limitations (such as the need to modify scenario details to reduce emotional bias) and addresses ethical considerations, which strengthens its credibility as a research design document.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates the technique of model replication and adaptation — systematically building on an established study (Herzog's 2003 factorial-survey approach) by adopting its variable structure while updating scenarios and generating new, timely data. This approach allows the researcher to compare results across time and cultural contexts while maintaining methodological consistency.
Structure breakdown
The proposal follows a standard research proposal format: an introduction establishing context and hypothesis; a literature review covering prior empirical studies; a methodology section detailing variables, scenarios, and analytical techniques; and a brief conclusion addressing ethical considerations. Each section builds logically on the last, moving from rationale to design to execution.
Introduction
Plea bargaining is not a legal punishment assigned to criminal behavior, but is a tool that has been utilized by an overburdened legal system poorly equipped to otherwise deal with the enormous numbers of criminal cases that filter through it. Without plea bargaining, law enforcement, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and finders of fact would be required to meet the legal definitions of the rules of evidence — processes that could involve lengthy timelines and significant costs associated with bringing cases to trial and through the court system. Plea bargaining has also served as a means by which to ensure that a person who cooperates with law enforcement and prosecutors benefits from that cooperation, usually through a reduced sentence. However, plea bargaining does not guarantee that a person who has bargained for a lesser sentence through the quid pro quo of cooperation will actually receive it.
At the end of the day, the decision to abide by a plea-bargained arrangement rests with the court. If the court finds that the weight of the crime and the resulting public opinion exceed the terms of the plea bargain, it can nonetheless impose whatever penalty falls within the legal parameters of remedies for that crime.
The hypothesis that constitutes the basis of this research is that the public is not supportive of plea bargaining in cases of violent crimes. The research proposed here will provide valuable information in support of this hypothesis. Based on the hypothesis, study and analysis of existing cases should support it with measurable data demonstrating that public opinion has impacted the sentencing decisions of courts regardless of plea bargains.
References
Bibas, S. (2005). White-collar plea bargaining and sentencing after Booker. William and Mary Law Review, 47(3), 721+.
Brown, M. P., & Bunnell, S. E. (2006). Negotiating justice: Prosecutorial perspectives on federal plea bargaining in the District of Columbia. American Criminal Law Review, 43(3), 1063+.
Champion, D. J. (1994). A criminal justice sourcebook. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Champion, D. J., & Mays, G. L. (1991). Transferring juveniles to criminal courts: Trends and implications for criminal justice. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Fisher, G. (2000). Plea bargaining's triumph. Yale Law Journal, 109(5), 855.
Herzog, S. (2003). The relationship between public perceptions of crime seriousness and support for plea-bargaining practices in Israel: A factorial-survey approach. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 94(1), 103+.
Jacobs, J. B., & Potter, K. (2001). Hate crimes: Criminal law and identity politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lindstrom, R., & Neumer, P. (2005). Jury trials and plea bargaining. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 95(4), 1423+.
McCoy, C. (1993). Politics and plea bargaining: Victims' rights in California. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mirsky, C. L., & Kahn, G. (1997, May/June). No bargain. The American Prospect, 56+.
Roberts, J. V., & Stalans, L. J. (1997). Public opinion, crime, and criminal justice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Zacharias, F. C. (1998). Justice in plea bargaining. William and Mary Law Review, 39(4), 1121–1189.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.