Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T18:03:54.052Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Structure of Discourse in Misdemeanor Plea Bargaining

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Douglas W. Maynard
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper examines transcriptions of tape-recorded plea bargaining sessions. It treats plea bargaining as a naturally occurring activity and seeks to discover formal decision-making patterns. In plea bargaining, participants have ways of exhibiting and responding to positions on how the case they are involved in should be handled. A decision is reached when the negotiating parties agree on a single position, and this is achieved by one of three different patterns or modes. Each pattern involves the presentation of (A) an opportunity for arriving at a mutually acceptable disposition and (B) the option of delaying determination of the disposition by continuance or trial. The ordered ways in which opportunities and options are related to each other constitute a discourse system for negotiation. This system exerts a “pressure” for the here-and-now resolution of cases, independent of negotiating parties' desires and inclinations. The focus on patterns of decision-making reveals a diversity of results and an interesting distribution of cases among the decision-making patterns.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 18 , Issue 1 , 1984 , pp. 75 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 by The Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1981 annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, Toronto. Charles Goodwin, Richard Lempert, Gerald Marwell, Emanuel Schegloff, and Aage Sorensen provided valuable comments, for which I am indebted. The research was partially supported by a grant from the Graduate School at the University of Wisconsin, Madison (Project #110642).

References

ALSCHULER, Albert W. (1968) “The Prosecutor's Role in Plea Bargaining,” 36 University of Chicago Law Review 50.Google Scholar
ALSCHULER, Albert W. (1975) “The Defense Attorney's Role in Plea Bargaining,” 84 Yale Law Journal 1179.Google Scholar
BALDWIN, John and McCONVILLE, Michael (1977) Negotiated Justice: Pressures to Plead Guilty. London: Martin Robertson.Google Scholar
BOTTOMS, Anthony E. and McCLEAN, John P. (1976) Defendants in the Criminal Process. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
BUCKLE, Suzann R. Thomas and Leonard G., BUCKLE (1977) Bargaining for Justice: Case Disposition and Reform in the Criminal Courts. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
COLLINS, Randall (1981) “On the Microfoundations of Macrosociology,” 86 American Journal of Sociology 984.Google Scholar
EISENSTEIN, James and Herbert, JACOB (1977) Felony Justice: An Organizational Analysis of Criminal Courts. Boston: Little Brown & Co.Google Scholar
EKEH, Peter P. (1974) Social Exchange Theory: The Two Traditions. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
FEELEY, Malcolm M. (1979) The Process is the Punishment: Handling Cases in a Lower Criminal Court. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
GARFINKEL, Harold (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
GIDDENS, Anthony (1976) New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretive Sociologies. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
GIDDENS, Anthony (1979) Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GOULDNER, Alvin Ward (1954) Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
GROSMAN, Brian A. (1969) The Prosecutor: An Inquiry into the Exercise of Discretion. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
HASENFELD, Yeheskel (1972) “People Processing Organizations: An Exchange Approach,” 37 American Sociological Review 256.Google Scholar
HEATH, Anthony F. (1976) Rational Choice and Social Exchange: A Critique of Exchange Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
HEUMANN, Milton (1978) Plea Bargaining: The Experiences of Prosecutors, Judges, and Defense Attorneys. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
IKLE, Fred C. (1964) How Nations Negotiate. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
JEFFERSON, Gail and Emanuel, SCHEGLOFF (n.d.) “Sketch: Some Orderly Aspects of Overlap in Natural Conversation.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
KLEIN, John F. (1976) Let's Make a Deal: Negotiating Justice. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
LONG, Lucinda (1974) “Innovation in Urban Criminal Misdemeanor Courts,” in Jacob, H. (ed.), The Potential for Reform of Criminal Justice. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
MATHENY, Albert R. (1979) “A Bibliography on Plea Bargaining,” 13 Law & Society Review 661.Google Scholar
MATHER, Lynn M. (1973) “Some Determinants of the Method of Case Disposition: Decision-Making by Public Defenders in Los Angeles,” 8 Law & Society Review 187.Google Scholar
MATHER, Lynn M. (1979) Plea Bargaining or Trial? The Process of Criminal-case Disposition. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.Google Scholar
MAYNARD, Douglas W. (1982a) “Defendant Attributes in Plea Bargaining: Notes on the Modeling of Sentencing Decisions,” 29 Social Problems 347.Google Scholar
MAYNARD, Douglas W. (1982b) “Aspects of Sequential Organization in Plea Bargaining Discourse,” 5 Human Studies 319.Google Scholar
MILLER, Herbert S., McDONALD, William F. and James A., CRAMER (1978) Plea Bargaining in the United States. Washington, DC: National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice.Google Scholar
NEUBAUER, David W. (1974) Criminal Justice in Middle America. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
POMERANTZ, Anita (1975) “Second Assessments: A Study of Some Features of Agreements/Disagreements.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Social Sciences Division, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
RIKER, William H. (1962) The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
ROSETT, Arthur I. and Donald R., CRESSEY (1976) Justice by Consent: Plea Bargains in the American Courthouse. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott.Google Scholar
ROSS, H. Laurence (1979) Settled Out of Court: The Social Process of Insurance Claims Adjustment. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
RUBIN, Jeffrey Z. and Bert R., BROWN (1975) The Social Psychology of Bargaining and Negotiation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
SACKS, Harvey, SCHEGLOFF, Emanuel A. and Gail, JEFFERSON (1974) “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation,” 50 Language 696.Google Scholar
SCHEGLOFF, Emanuel A. and Harvey, SACKS (1974) “Opening up Closings,” in Turner, R. (ed.), Ethnomethodology. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
SCHELLING, Thomas C. (1963) The Strategy of Conflict. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
SCHENKEIN, Jim (ed.) (1978) Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
STEVENS, Carl M. (1963) Strategy and Collective Bargaining Negotiation. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
STRAUSS, Anselm L. (1978) Negotiations: Varieties, Contexts, Processes, and Social Order. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
SUDNOW, David (1965) “Normal Crimes: Sociological Features of the Penal Code in a Public Defender's Office,” 12 Social Problems 255.Google Scholar
UTZ, Pamela (1978) Settling the Facts. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar