In Washington State, the authority for bringing charges alleging illegal acts and offering plea bargains rests with the prosecutor. Only 5 - 10% of all criminal convictions result from trials, which means 90 - 95% of all convictions are from plea deals. Plea deals often occur in cases involving animal cruelty and neglect. It is vital that citizens understand this aspect of the legal process as it affects so many people and animals.
The plea deal itself is a contract between the state or city (represented by the prosecutor) and the defendant and is worked out by both parties. The Sentencing Reform Act sets out the scope of the power to negotiate pleas in RCW 9.94A.421. It allows the prosecutor to “do any of the following”:
Move for dismissal of any of the acts or events. Most defendants are charged with more than one crime, so the prosecutor can make pleading guilty to one or two crimes more appealing by dismissing other charged crimes.
Recommend a particular sentence if a defendant pleads guilty. A common tactic both sides expect is an offer to recommend x years in prison if the defendant pleads guilty to a crime. Note that the language here says “recommend a sentence”. Parties will present their final pleas and resulting recommendations to the presiding judge. The judge has considerable discretion to increase or decrease a sentence recommendation if they feel it is just.
Recommend a sentence outside the sentencing range. Here the parties will need to justify to the judge why the defendant deserves a shorter, longer or no sentence at all. The sentencing range is an efficiency tool that provides a guideline for judges and prosecutors but is not binding.
Agree to file or not file a certain charge or count. Agreeing to charge or not charge a crime can be powerful. Counts are the number of crimes committed. This aspect is important in animal cruelty cases as the most egregious cases we’ve seen involve abuse to many animals. Each animal harmed can be a crime, and each crime is counted.
Make any other promise to the defendant except agree not to allege prior convictions. This odd language means that a prosecutor cannot hide prior convictions, but gives wide discretion to craft appropriate pleas.
The plea itself is a conviction, not a confession. It must be given voluntarily and intelligently and be on the record. The judge must personally talk to the accused and find out whether it was indeed voluntary and that the person understands what it means, including the nature of the charge and the consequences of the plea.
There are pros and cons to the criminal justice system’s reliance on plea deals. It gives prosecutors with heavy caseloads a tool to meet speedy trial requirements, reduces the impact of a trial on the victim or family, and allows weak cases to be resolved with guilty pleas to lesser charges. Defense lawyers benefit from plea deals as they reduce costs to the family and result in lesser charges for the accused. Judges like plea deals as they reveal weaknesses in cases and reduce caseloads. However, plea bargains can result in criticism of prosecutors for perceived short sentences, and defendants may feel pressured to accept plea deals. In general, plea deals provide adverse incentives for lawyers and judges to focus on disposition, not justice. There are lingering racial disparities in the offers made by prosecutors. Finally, the absence of trials in favor of plea bargains results in loss of civic engagement in the court system.