×

Cookie Consent

საიტით სარგებლობის გაგრძელებით, შენ ეთანხმები Cookie ჩანაწერების გამოყენებას, მეტი ინფორმაციისთვის იხილეთ კონფიდენციალურობის პოლიტიკა

ციფრული იდენტიფიკატორი
doi.org/10.36475/L.A.W.14
შემოკლება
L.A.W.
გამოცემა
ელ.ვერსია
ბეჭდური

ამ სტატიაში

    რეზიუმე - Journal Law and World

    Volume 9, Issue 1

    PLEA BARGAIN – AIM, IMPORTANCE AND PROBLEMATIC ASPECTS IN THE REALITY OF THE US, GERMANY AND GEORGIA

    Authors: Kalenike Uridia1,

    Kalenike Uridia

    Lawyer, International Relations Manager of the NGO "Young Barristers"; Strategic and international litigation lawyer of the law firm "Kaikatsishvili and Barristers", Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Faculty of Law

    Email: kalenike.uridia044@law.tsu.edu.ge


    Elene Landia2,

    Elene Landia

    Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Faculty of Law, DAAD scholarship holder at the University of Leipzig; Erasmus exchange student at University of Münster (Germany)

    Email: elene.landia814@law.tsu.edu.ge


    Nikoloz Thomasiani3

    Nikoloz Thomasiani

    Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Faculty of Law, Attorney's assistant in the legal firm "Lawyers Professional Corporation"

    Email: tomasiani17@gmail.com



    Affiliation: Lawyer, International Relations Manager of the NGO "Young Barristers"; Strategic and international litigation lawyer of the law firm "Kaikatsishvili and Barristers", Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Faculty of Law1, Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Faculty of Law, DAAD scholarship holder at the University of Leipzig; Erasmus exchange student at University of Münster (Germany)2 Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Faculty of Law, Attorney's assistant in the legal firm "Lawyers Professional Corporation"3

    Abstract: The parties come to a plea bargain, based on which the defendant receives a reduced punishment than would be appropriate in a formal trial. Based on its core, it is obvious that the given system largely favors the accused, but after a thorough investigation, we can see that several significant concerns need to be addressed right now. The purpose of the paper that is being provided is to examine the plea bargain, its growth over time, and its status in three distinct states. The writers of the article examine the realities in Germany, Georgia, and the United States of America, which will be a fascinating depiction of the present situation. The study of the facts provided will be highly fascinating and varied in this regard because the United States of America is a country of Anglo-American law, and Germany and Georgia are countries of continental European law. The article will examine not only the legislative history of the de- scribed issue in the given states but also genuine situations, using which the problematic elements of this institution in all three nations will be distinctly highlighted. As a conclusion, the authors' viewpoint on the current models in each of the three states will be stated.

    Keywords: The US, Germany, Georgia, Plea Bargain, Court


    Language: EN

    views: 16479
    Download
      მსგავსი სტატიები ვერ მოიძებნა!




    ბიბლიოგრაფია:

    1. Fafiashvili, L., Tumanishvili, G., Akubardia, I., Gogniashvili, N., Ivanidze, M., Criminal Procedural Law of Georgia, Meridian Publishing House, Tbilisi, 2017.
    2. Malcolm M. Feeley, Plea Bargaining and the Structure of the Criminal Process, Berkeley Law Berkeley Law Scholarship Repository.
    3. Albonetti, C., (1992). Charge Reduction: An Analysis of Prosecutorial Discretion in Burglary and Robbery cases. Journal of Quantitative Criminology.
    4. Bibas, S., (2001). Judicial Fact-Finding and Sentence Enhancements in a World of Guilty Pleas. Yale Law Journal.
    5. Bibas, S., (2004). The Feeney Amendment and the Continuing Rise of Prosecutorial Power to Plea Bargain. Journal of Criminal Law Criminology.
    6. Champion, D., (1989). Private Counsels and Public Defenders: A Look at Weak Cases, Prior Records, and Leniency in Plea Bargaining. Journal of Criminal Justice.
    7. Holmes, M., Daudistel, H., and Taggart, W., (1992). Plea Bargaining Policy and State District Court Caseloads: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Law and Society Review.
    8. King, N., Soule, D., Steen, S., and Weidner, R., (2005). When Process Affects Punishment: Differences in Sentences After Guilty Plea, Bench Trial, and Jury Trial in Five Guideline States. Columbia Law Review.
    9. Meyer, J., and Gray, T., (1997). Drunk Drivers in the Courts: Legal and Extra-Legal Factorsaffecting Pleas and Sentences. Journal of Criminal Justice.
    10. 10. Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 260 (1971).
    11. Piehl, A., and Bushway, S., (2007). Measuring and Explaining Charge Bargaining. Journal of Quantitative Criminology.
    12. Steffensmeier, D., and DeMuth, S., (2001). Ethnicity and Judges’ Sentencing Decisions: Hispanic-Black-White Comparisons. Criminology.
    13. Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J., and Kramer, J., (1998). The Interaction of Race, Gender, and Age in Criminal Sentencing: The Punishment Cost of Being Young, Black, and Male. Criminology.
    14. Uviller, R., (2000). The Neutral Prosecutor: The Obligation of Dispassion in an Enthusiastic Pursuit. Fordham Law Review.
    15. Steffensmeier, D., and Hebert, C., (1999). Women and Men Policymakers: Do the Judge’s Gender Affect the Sentencing of Criminal Defendants? Social Forces.
    16. Ulmer, J., and Bradley, M., (2006). Variation in Trial Penalties Among Serious Violent Offenses. Criminology.
    17. Ma, Y., (2002). Prosecutorial Discretion and Plea Bargaining in the United States, France, Germany, and Italy: A Comparative Perspective. International Criminal Justice Review.
    18. Kurlychek, M., and Johnson, B., (2004). The Juvenile Penalty: A Comparison of Juvenile and Young Adult Sentencing Outcomes in Criminal Court. Criminology.
    19. Lee, S., (2005). The Scales of Justice: Balancing Neutrality and Efficiency in Plea Bargaining Encounters. Discourse Society.
    20. Steffensmeier, D., Kramer, J., and Streifel, C., (1993). Gender and Imprisonment Decisions. Criminology.
    21. Stuntz, W., (2004). Plea Bargaining and Criminal Law’s Disappearing Shadow. Harvard Law Review
    22. Law of Georgia, Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia. 03/11/2009.
    23. Law of Georgia, Criminal Code of Georgia. 22/07/1999.
    24. Law of Georgia of July 25, 2014, N 2517, explanatory card.
    25. Tkesheliadze, G., Lekveishvili, M., Nachkibia, G., Toduana, N., Mchedlishvili-Hedrichi, K., Mamulashvili, G., Ivanidze, Sarkeulidze, I., Criminal Law General Part, Meridian Publishing House, TB, 2019.
    26. Crime and Criminal Justice History in Germany. A Report on Recent Trends Herbert Reinke; Link13, N°1, 2009.
    27. Bundesverfassungsgericht, Press Release No. 17/2013 of 19 March 2013 - Legal Regulation of Plea Bargaining is Constitutional - Informal Bargains are Impermissible: Decision - 2 BvR 2628/10.
    28. Link>
    29. Link
    30. Link

    სქოლიო:

    1. Link [Last seen 27.03.2023].
    2. Fafiashvili, L., Tumanishvili, G., Akubardia, I., Gogniashvili, N., Ivanidze, M., Criminal Procedural Law of Georgia, Meridian Publishing House, Tbilisi, 2017, p. 545.
    3. Malcolm M. Feeley, Plea Bargaining and the Structure of the Criminal Process, Berkeley Law Berkeley Law Scholarship Repository, 1-1-1982, 338-354.
    4. Albonetti, C., (1992). Charge Reduction: An Analysis of Prosecutorial Discretion in Burglary and Robbery cases. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 8:317-333.
    5. Bibas, S., (2001). Judicial Fact-Finding and Sentence Enhancements in a World of Guilty Pleas. Yale Law Journal 110:1097-1120.
    6. Bibas, S., (2004). The Feeney Amendment and the Cotinuing Rise of Prosecutorial Power to Plea Bargain. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 94:295-309.
    7. Champion, D., (1989). Private Counsels and Public Defenders: A Look at Weak Cases, Prior Records, and Leniency in Plea Bargaining. Journal of Criminal Justice 17:253-263.
    8. Holmes, M., Daudistel, H., and Taggart, W., (1992). Plea Bargaining Policy and State District Court Caseloads: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Law and Society Review 26:139-160.
    9. King, N., Soule, D., Steen, S., and Weidner, R., (2005). When Process Affects Punishment: Differences in Sentences After Guilty Plea, Bench Trial, and Jury Trial in Five Guideline States. Columbia Law Review 105:960-1009.
    10. Meyer, J., and Gray, T., (1997). Drunk Drivers in the Courts: Legal and Extra-Legal Factorsaffecting Pleas and Sentences. Journal of Criminal Justice 25:155-163.
    11. Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 260 (1971)12 Piehl, A., and Bushway, S., (2007). Measuring and Explaining Charge Bargaining. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 23:105-125.
    12. Piehl, A., and Bushway, S., (2007). Measuring and Explaining Charge Bargaining. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 23:105-125.
    13. Steffensmeier, D., and DeMuth, S., (2001). Ethnicity and Judges’ Sentencing Decisions: Hispanic-Black-White Comparisons. Criminology 39:145-78.
    14. Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J., and Kramer, J., (1998). The Interaction of Race, Gender, and Age in Criminal Sentencing: The Punishment Cost of Being Young, Black, and Male. Criminology 36:763-98.
    15. Uviller, R., (2000). The Neutral Prosecutor: The Obligation of Dispassion in an Enthusiastic Pursuit. Fordham Law Review 68:1695-1718.
    16. Steffensmeier, D., and Hebert, C., (1999). Women and Men Policymakers: Do the Judge’s Gender Affect the Sentencing of Criminal Defendants? Social Forces 77:1163- 196.
    17. Ulmer, J., and Bradley, M., (2006). Variation in Trial Penalties Among Serious Violent Offenses. Criminology 44:631- 670.
    18. Ma, Y., (2002). Prosecutorial Discretion and Plea Bargaining in the United States, France, Germany, and Italy: A Comparative Perspective. International Criminal Justice Review 12:22-52.
    19. Kurlychek, M., and Johnson, B., (2004). The Juvenile Penalty: A Comparison of Juvenile and Young Adult Sentencing Outcomes in Criminal Court. Criminology 42:485-515.
    20. Lee, S., (2005). The Scales of Justice: Balancing Neutrality and Efficiency in Plea Bargaining Encounters. Discourse & Society 16:33-44.
    21. Steffensmeier, D., Kramer, J., and Streifel, C., (1993). Gender and Imprisonment Decisions. Criminology 31:411-46
    22. Stuntz, W., (2004). Plea Bargaining and Criminal Law’s Disappearing Shadow. Harvard Law Review 117:2548-2569.
    23. https://p.dw.com/p/180F3[Last seen 29.11.2022]
    24. Link [Last seen 24.03.2023].
    25. Link [Last seen 24.03.2023].
    26. Crime and Criminal Justice History in Germany. A Report on Recent Trends Herbert Reinke; VOL. 13, N°1, 2009; paragraph 2.
    27. Link [Last seen 29.11.2022].
    28. Link [Last seen 24.03.2023].
    29. Bundesverfassungsgericht, Press Release No. 17/2013 of 19 March 2013 - Legal Regulation of Plea Bargaining is Constitutional - Informal Bargains are Impermissible: Decision - 2 BvR 2628/10.
    30. Article 211. The law was published on 03/11/2009. Editorial valid until July 24, 2014. Law of Georgia, Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia, Article 209, Article 1. The law was published on 03/11/2009.
    31. 31 Law of Georgia of July 25, 2014, N 2517, explanatory card. An explanatory card is available at Link
    32. Law of Georgia, Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia,
    33. Law of Georgia, Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia, Article 13, Section 2. The law was published on 03/11/2009.
    34. Law of Georgia, Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia, Article 210. Law published on 03/11/2009. Editorial valid until July 24, 2014.
    35. Law of Georgia, Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia, Article 210, Article 3. The law was published on 03/11/2009.
    36. Law of Georgia, Code of Criminal Procedure of Georgia, Article 210, Article 2. The law was published on 03/11/2009.
    37. 37 Law of Georgia, Criminal Code of Georgia, Article 55. Law published on 22/07/1999. Link
    38. Tkesheliadze, G., Lekveishvili, M., Nachkibia, G., Todua, N., Mchedlishvili-Hedrichi, K., Mamulashvili, G., Ivanidze, M., Sarkeulidze, I., Criminal Law General Part, Meridian Publishing House, TB, 2019, p. 600.
    გამოქვეყნების საფასური
    უფასო
    მთავარი რედაქტორი
    იოსებ კელენჯერიძე
    გამოქვეყნების ენა
    ინგლისური
    ქართული

    dealSeal

    Copyright ©2022 ყველა უფლება დაცულია