Lawyer David Serna Talks About Plea Bargains

Criminal defense lawyer David Serna believes that due to an overburdened criminal justice system, the traditional image of a criminal trial now became all but obsolete in the American legal system, and the majority of criminal convictions now result from plea bargains. Their prevalence has now risen as a matter of necessity for many prosecutors and judges.

 

But what are plea bargains? They are an agreement between the defense and their prosecutor, in which the defendant pleads guilty or no contest (nolo contendere) in exchange for concessions by the prosecutor.

 

Whatever agreement the defense and prosecution may reach, lawyer David Serna believes it is crucial for defense attorneys to thoroughly examine it and ensure the benefit their client will get. They might involve a recommendation for a lenient sentence, a reduction in the charge level, or the number of charges if the defendant faces multiple charges.

 

Nationally recognized criminal defense lawyer David Serna believes that plea bargains have some advantages too. It is why defense lawyers should explain every crucial aspect of this type of agreement to ensure that their clients fully understand their options and their consequences. Sometimes it will be easier for the defendant to seal or expunge a criminal record after a plea bargain. In civil cases, no one can use no contest pleas against the defendant as an admission of liability.

 

Many people believe that plea bargains are only shortcuts that deny the defendant their right to have their voices heard in court. But lawyer David Serna thinks these agreements are already firmly entrenched in the system. And because of these plea bargains, defendants get to appreciate their ability to arrange a result that allows them to move forward and avoid the uncertainty of a trial.

 

However, although it offers benefits to the defendant, lawyer David Serna believes defense lawyers must thoroughly discuss their clients’ agreement with the prosecution. Some may not be willing to give up their rights and freedom in exchange for the prosecution’s terms. Defense lawyers must explain to the defendant that the result of a plea bargain is essentially the same as a conviction, wherein they will lose the same civil rights.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Impeaching a Witness Based on Inconsistencies

One way to undermine the evidence of an opponent is to impeach his or her witnesses based on inconsistencies in his or her testimony. Lawyers are always advised to listen during the direct and cross-examination because this is the perfect time to observe the testimony and behavior of the witnesses of their opponent. David Serna, a lawyer of over 40 years, offers helpful tips to both new and experienced lawyers. Today, he discusses prior statements of witnesses governed by the Federal Rules on Evidence 613. Discrepancies in testimonies are expected when several witnesses are testifying to the same incident. It is but natural that these individuals remember the details of the incident differently.   However, lawyers should consider only those errors and testimonial inconsistencies that are significant and deserving of the jury’s attention. Persistently bringing up minor inconsistencies will only waste the time of the court and will most likely annoy the jury. FRE 613 prov...
Read more

Cross-Examination of a Crash Reconstructionist

Crash reconstruction is a science that involves mathematics and physics to determine what happened before, during, and after a collision. Reconstruction witnesses testify about the details of a collision, such as the speed of a vehicle, the cause of a collision, and the motion of the vehicle before and after an impact. David Serna, a lawyer of over 40 years, advises young prosecutors in preparing for the cross-examination of defense reconstruction witnesses. The prosecutor must know whether the evidence or data gathered and used by the witness supports a reliable conclusion. Here are three things to remember before conducting a cross-examination of reconstruction witnesses. 1.        Review the crash report It is important to read the crash report of the opponent’s expert crash reconstructionist. The prosecutor’s crash reconstructionist can help him understand the factors considered by the opponent’s reconstruction witness and determine the shor...
Read more

The Rules on Preliminary Hearing and Trial

Preliminary Hearings take place before a judge and only after the prosecutor has filed charges against a person. These hearings are not trials, which may be conducted before a group of individuals, called a grand jury. There are, however, procedural rules on trial that similarly apply to preliminary hearings. In this brief article, David Serna, a lawyer and educator for many years, discusses some of the rules that apply to preliminary hearings and trials. Like a trial, an ordinary witness can testify during a preliminary hearing. Generally, the testimony must be based on what they perceive and not on opinion. However, during a preliminary hearing, unlike a trial, hearsay evidence is allowed and admissible. Three things can happen after a preliminary hearing. If the charges are weak and unfounded, the judge would most likely dismiss the case outright. If there is, however, a finding of probable cause, the judge may either reduce or retain the charges made by the prosecutor...
Read more