Lawyers, Guns & Punishment: Assessing the Impact of Plea Bargaining on Weapons Cases in Maryland

• In Event: NIJ Day: New Scientific Evidence for What Works in Combating Firearm Violence

Abstract

Firearm violence is a major policy concern in America, yet little is known about how criminal courts address these crimes or how their treatment of firearms offenders shapes future violence. The overwhelming majority of criminal cases are settled by plea. Prior work suggests that plea deals can powerfully mitigate punishment, which may diminish deterrence and incapacitation. Conversely, imprisonment may have criminogenic effects on future offending. This project provides an empirical investigation of the impact that plea bargaining has on sentencing and recidivism outcomes for firearms-involved offenders. We compile judicial case processing and recidivism data from detailed criminal histories for a cohort of over 20,000 firearms offenders in the state of Maryland to examine the effects of plea-bargaining on punishment. Preliminary results indicate pleading guilty has large and consistent effects on sentence severity, significantly lowering expected punishments for firearms-involved offenders. Recidivism results are more nuanced, suggesting relationships may vary by type of firearm offense. These findings raise important questions about the public safety implications of plea-bargaining in firearms cases. Although short-term incapacitation effects may be compromised by large plea discounts, criminogenic prison experiences could lead to less favorable long-term outcomes. We conclude with a discussion of future research and policy considerations at the nexus of firearm offending, criminal punishment and public safety.

Author

• Brian D. Johnson, University of Maryland, College Park