Alford Court Case Analysis

1183 Words5 Pages

Alford plea – When a defendant neither wants to admit full guilt, nor do they want to plead no contest or innocent, there is yet another possible option. If a defendant wants to assert that they are indeed innocent, but they know that the prosecution has enough evidence to prove that they committed the crime they are being charged for, they can enter an “Alford plea,” which is also known as a “Kennedy plea” in West Virginia. Essentially, this plea is a guilty plea, not because of an admission to the crime, but because the prosecutor has enough evidence to obtain a conviction in court. Plea bargain – When the prosecutor and the defendant in a criminal case make an agreement on a guilty plea in return from some sort of concession from the prosecutor, the agreement is known as a “plea bargain.” The most common agreement and concession between the two parties is often for the defendant to plead guilty to a particular charge (or charges) in return for a less serious charge (or charges), a dismissal of other charges, or even a lesser sentence. As an example, the defendant in a felony theft charge might have the chance to plead guilty to a misdemeanor theft charge. This lessens the workload on the court, it still gives the prosecution a conviction, and it gives the defendant a lesser sentence. …show more content…

Once the final determination has been made, the court will either find the defendant guilty and he/she will be sentenced, OR the defendant will be found not guilty and the case will be closed. Basically, a conditional guilty plea is a defendant claiming that they might be guilty, but some details need to be looked at before the final claim of

More about Alford Court Case Analysis