Abstract
Phillip Bivens, accused of raping and killing a woman in Mississippi in 1979, was confronted with this choice: take the bargain of life in prison, or go to trial and face the death penalty. After three decades in prison, Bivens was exonerated in 2010 by DNA tests conducted by the Innocence Project in New Orleans. Why would Bivens, who was factually innocent, plead guilty to a crime he did not commit and forgo his constitutional right to a trial? How can this be explained? Bivens’s choice may be deemed rational because his choice was between life, albeit life in prison, and death. But what about defendants confronted with life in prison or twenty years in prison—why would an innocent defendant plead guilty then? ...
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2017
Recommended Citation
Lauren Clatch, Shining a Light on the Shadow-of-Trial Model: A Bridge Between Discounting and Plea Bargaining, 102 Minn. L. Rev. 923 (2017).
