Alford Court Case Analysis

Alton Logan was at age 28 when he was arrested and charged for a murder that occurred on January 11, 1982. The fatal shooting of Lloyd Wickliffe, who was an off-duty corrections officer passing by as a security guard, happened during a robbery attempt at a McDonald’s restaurant in the suburbs of Chicago. Mr. Logan was sentenced to life in prison even though there was no physical evidence linking him to the murder. Two other separate attorneys knew that he was innocent because one of their clients confessed to them privately that he murdered the security officer. He was an innocent person who winded up spending 26 years of his life in prison.

MILLERSBURG — A Wooster man on Wednesday was given a chance to avoid prison when he was sentenced to complete a treatment program for admittedly being in possession of methamphetamine. Shaun Hall, 38, 540 High St., previously pleaded guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to aggravated possession of meth. In exchange for his guilty plea, a related charge of aggravated trafficking in meth was dismissed. Hall had faced up to a year in prison for the charge, and Judge Robert Rinfret imposed a term of 11 months, but immediately suspended the period of incarceration in favor of five years of community control, which includes the condition he complete a treatment program at the Stark Regional Community Corrections Center.

You may have heard about the $150,000 shirt in 2004 that was owned by Alan Newsom. The shirt was one of the reasons for Newsom v. Albemarle case that went to court. The shirt Alan Newsom wore was from an NRA shooting sports camp. He wore the shirt to school in hopes of encouraging other students to go to the camp, but he was told to turn the shirt inside out for the rest of the day. Later that same day Alan wanted to take them to court.

In a criminal case, first the jury is selected, followed by a preliminary hearing where it is decided if there is enough evidence for the case to be brought up in the court of law, then an arraignment occurs where the defendant pleads guilty, not guilty, or no contest. After this, the plea hearing begins where the defendant can make an agreement with the prosecutor to make a plea bargain, which is pleading guilty to a less serious crime and giving up the right to a speedy public trial to avoid risk conviction of greater penalty for a more serious crime, after which the trail starts. During the trial, opening statements are given, evidence is presented, examination and cross-examination of witnesses take place, followed by closing statements. Once the trial is finished the judge instructs the jury and they leave to deliberate. The jury returns with their verdict only if the decision is unanimous, if it isn’t the judge orders a mistrial where the trial is called off completely or a new jury is selected.

In this case, how do we reconcile the benefits of plea bargaining with the importance of justice? Our criminal justice system is a system where “95% of criminal defendants plead guilty to the charges against them” whether they are guilty or not (pg 11).

munity; if she could be a witch, then anyone could. Magistrates even questioned Sarah Good's 4-year-old daughter, Dorothy, and her timid answers were construed as a confession. The questioning got more serious in April when Deputy Governor Thomas Danforth and his assistants attended the hearings. Dozens of people from Salem and other Massachusetts villages were brought in for questioning.

There are quite a few things I am not allowed to discuss, due to confidentiality, but the things that I can discuss are the observations of court hearings, pre-trials, and revocation hearings. I found it to be very interesting how the judge informs the offender of his or her rights under the United States Constitution before the offender states whether guilty or not and that if the offender pleads guilty that his or her rights are then taken and would rest in the federal courts hands. Usually when the offender pleads guilty, they are under oath, being recorded, and tend to get the lesser sentence, but that is not always the case. It just depends on the case and what all is involved as far as the crime committed and the offender’s history. If the offender pleads not guilty, then there will be a trial that forms on a later date.

A plea bargain is an agreement between the prosecutor and the defendant in a criminal case. The prosecutor gives the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to the original charge with less than the maximum sentence. For example, the prosecution and the defense may agree to a misdemeanor charge instead of a felony charge or the parties may agree to a sentence of 12 years instead of 20 years if the recommended sentence for that crime is 10-20 years imprisonment.

What is “pleading the fifth?” The Fifth Amendment encompasses most of the protections against the United States government’s abuse of power. Many people do not realize that the Fifth Amendment is more than what is shown on television. The five main clauses of the Fifth Amendment provide many rights to citizens who have been accused of crimes. In 1789, James Madison wrote the Fifth Amendment along with nine other amendments, which would become the Bill of Rights (Thomson).

Plea Bargaining is the most effective tool of prosecutors to minimize the time required to obtain convictions. Around ninety percent of cases are concluded using plea bargaining. (Barkan and Bryjack, Page 2) This process moves cases through the system quickly and prevents the need to add more judges and court systems if these cases were to go to trial. (Barkan and Bryjack, Page 249) From the judge and prosecutors point of view, this is a necessary and effective method of managing caseloads.

I do not think that the plea bargain lets someone off easy. While they might receive a lesser change they also are having the fact that they admitted to doing something taken into consideration by the court system when they decide on the punishment. I feel that it equals out in the long run for those who end up taking the plea bargain. In small cases yes the person might get off with just probation, but is probation was something in condensation then the crime could not have been that detrimental. They would not offer something like probation to a deranged murderer if they confessed to killing someone.

Prosecutors have the power to send offenders away which allows them to make harsh decisions. They offer plea bargains to offenders which often will enable them to do time in prison. Pfaff stated that "as long as prosecutors simply use the tough laws as a bargaining chip, not real punishment, legislators can reap the political benefits of looking tough on crime while avoiding difficult financial decisions" (Pfaff, 2017, P136). Prosecutors offer a plea bargain to get rid of cases quickly and not allow offenders to go to trial because they might receive more prison

Since the courts are backlogged and many public defenders and judges being overworked, this causes plea bargaining to be used repeatedly. According to Walker et al. (2018), plea bargaining leaves many people no option but to plea guilty even when this is not their best option. This is due to a multitude of reasons but mainly to receive a lesser charge. For example, a felony and little time in jail may be better than risking multiple felonies and an excessive amount of time in jail.

People plead guilty for crimes that are not committed by them to avoid trial, but by doing so the right decision wasn’t made.

For those in prison, those who snitch saying the defendant confessed, testifying can be a bargaining chip; the state will often reduce sentence time or