Defendants Can Now Make More Informed Decisions About Plea Bargains

At the core of every bargain is an assessment of whether benefits outweigh costs. Plea bargains are no different. Thanks to legislation promoted by the Libertas Institute, defendants are now in a better position to evaluate whether a plea bargain serves their interests. 

In 2021, Utah passed Senate Bill 216, requiring the Sentencing Commission to compile a guide of collateral consequences that can be imposed as a result of a conviction for a crime. Most people are aware that a criminal conviction can lead to fines and jail time. However, it is less widely known that being found guilty of any felony establishes grounds for divorce or that some domestic violence convictions will impact the right to possess a gun. The bill was designed to fill this potential knowledge gap.

The Sentencing Commission recently released the fruits of its considerable labor: a draft version of its collateral consequences guide. The guide is intended to be a comprehensive list of collateral consequences and the crimes for which they may be imposed. Given that the guide lists over 150 collateral consequences, it is a powerful tool to help defendants and their attorneys ensure they have thought through all the potential consequences of a plea, which might otherwise be overlooked. This is especially crucial given that many collateral consequences deal with the ability to be employed in professions ranging from athletic trainer to music therapist. 

Defendants hold the right to trial, and there are circumstances when waiving that right and accepting a plea bargain are in a defendant’s best interest. However, that is a weighty decision and should be made with complete information. The collateral consequences guide represents an important step in ensuring that this decision is fully informed.

Author Profile Image
About the author

Amy Pomeroy

Amy has spent the last several years prosecuting crime as a Deputy Utah County Attorney, giving her a front-row seat to what is and is not working in our criminal justice system. Prior to that, she worked at the Pacific Legal Foundation doing constitutional litigation and ran a state representative’s office. She received her bachelor’s degree in political science from Brigham Young University before graduating from J. Reuben Clark Law School cum laude. She lives in Orem with her husband and their three energetic children and enjoys woodworking and being outdoors.

Share Post:

Fighting for a Future Where Individuals Are Fully Liberated to Pursue Their Dreams, Free from Coercion and Control.

You Might Also Like

RAND Corporation review of the research found that people who took part in education programs in prison had 43% lower odds of recidivism than those who did not, and that the programs cost less than the reincarceration they prevent.
The scale of the program raises an important question: What does educational freedom look like when it is supported with public money?
That goal may sound reasonable on paper. In practice, CEQA has increasingly become a tool for obstructing housing development, exacerbating California’s housing shortage and keeping costs stubbornly high.

Help us Nail and Scale Policies to Reduce Government Control

Your tax-deductible contributions to Libertas Institute increase freedom across the country.