Back to Summaries

A First Look at the Plea Deal Experiences of Juveniles Tried in Adult Court

Type of Source
Non-Law Review Journal
Author(s)
Tarika Daftary-Kapur & Tina M. Zottoli
Source
13 International Journal of Forensic Mental Health 323
Publication Year
2010

Summary

Most juveniles charged in adult court accept plea deals, where the decisions to be made differ considerably from those at trial. A decision to plead guilty must be made voluntarily and intelligently. Though they are generally competent to make plea decisions, juveniles may be overpowered by prosecutors’ coercive practices. Because of their relative inability to acknowledge risks or prioritize long-term consequences, adolescents are more vulnerable to the pressure, deception, and suggestive questioning of authority figures. Young defendants are at an increased risk of due process violations. With a focus on proceedings in juvenile court, two previous studies illustrated that juveniles are more easily coerced and much more likely to accept plea deals than adults are. Through open-question interviews of forty juveniles who were offered plea deals in adult criminal court, this study explored five response qualities and hypothesized that participants would demonstrate the same deficits in legal understanding and appreciation of consequences. The majority of participants were more concerned about short-term outcomes and could not articulate outcomes associated with accepting their plea deals. A majority also maintained that they themselves decided to accept the deal, while simultaneously acknowledging their attorneys’ and parents’ hopes that they would plead guilty. Whether charged as juveniles or adults, young defendants exhibit cognitive deficits that raise questions about their competence. Attorneys and courts should take steps accordingly to mitigate potential associated risks.

Key Quote

“On the one hand, the majority of the offenders in our sample reported that their plea decisions were autonomous[.] . . . On the other hand, many of our participants displayed basic deficits in their understanding of plea deals and had incomplete knowledge of the options available to them . . . , and their decisions to accept their plea deals appear to have been overly influenced by short-term outcomes.” p. 333