NCJ Number
130857
Journal
California Law Review Volume: 77 Issue: 2 Dated: (March 1989) Pages: 417-453
Date Published
1989
Length
37 pages
Annotation
This article proposes that crime victims be given the right to veto plea bargain offers that they perceive to be too harsh or too lenient.
Abstract
The article first reviews the crime victim's historical role in the criminal justice system and addresses the system's relatively recent rejection of the victim in the context of both the changing American attitudes toward crime and the emergence of the Victims' Rights Movement. The reforms that have been implemented to permit victim influence at the post-trial and pretrial stages of the process are reviewed. The article concludes that these reforms have either been ineffective or constitutionally flawed. The proposal for a victim veto of pretrial negotiations is then presented. The proposal presumes that the prosecutor, in filing criminal charges, has indicated that the State is ready and willing to proceed to trial. Under the terms of the proposal, prosecutors would be required to inform the victim of any plea offer before presenting it to the defense. Should the victim not approve of the plea offer, the prosecutor would be required either to reformulate the vetoed offer until the victim agrees with its terms or to proceed to trial. A critical examination of the proposal considers its constitutionality. Policy rationales for expanding the victim's role in the criminal disposition process are presented, and the practical costs and benefits of a victim's veto of plea offers are assessed. 164 footnotes