Guilty Pleas
Current Research Projects
A Systematic Analysis of Plea Hearings of Wrongly Convicted Individuals
In this project, we are systematically coding the plea hearing transcripts of approximately 90 individuals who falsely pled guilty but who have now all received certificates of innocence. In addition to coding common elements of plea hearings (e.g., statements of voluntariness, rights reviewed, prosecutorial proffers of evidence), we are also coding for statements of actual innocence. We are also coding subsequent affidavits from the individuals, which include their self-reported reasons for falsely pleading guilty. This project is led by Talley Bettens and Allison Redlich.
Spanish-English Language Court Interpreters and the Plea Process
This project is a survey of Spanish-English language court interpreters in the U.S. to better understand their experiences assisting in plea cases involving a Spanish-speaking defendant. This research is funded by the American Psychology-Law Society (APLS) Grants-in-Aid and the College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHSS) Faculty Research and Development Awards (FRDA). This project is led by Jessica Arredondo Cruz.
A Content Analysis of Spanish Tender-of-Plea Forms in the US
Tender-of-plea forms are the written method of informing defendants of their ceded trial rights and the consequences of entering a guilty plea. These forms are optional and thus not all courts use them. In this project, we first determine whether jurisdictions that have an English form also have developed forms in Spanish and other languages. Second, we analyze and compare the content of tender-of-plea forms written in English and in Spanish to determine if Spanish-speaking individuals receive the same information as English-speaking ones about their plea rights, consequences, and process. This research is led by Jessica Arredondo Cruz.
Understanding Youth Engagement in the Plea Process
FUNDING AGENCY: National Science Foundation
PIs: Allison Redlich, Jodi Quas
In collaboration with Dr. Jodi Quas at the University of California, Irvine, we researched youth and adult engagement in the plea process. In the first phase of this research, we surveyed legal professionals (i.e., prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, and guardians ad litem) about their perceptions of juvenile defendants’ engagement in the plea process, including the juvenile’s legal understanding of and participation in the plea process. In the second phase of this project, we conducted systematic observations of juvenile and adult plea hearings and interviewed defendants soon after the hearing. In this phase, we assessed juveniles' and adults' engagement in the plea process, including how much defendants understand about the process and how much they participate in the proceedings. The final phase of the study, which is currently underway, involves a one-year post-hearing follow-up of objective records to determine if engagement in plea hearings predicts future recidivism and court-related compliance. This project is funded by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute of Justice.
Publications
Redlich, A.D., Domagalski, K., Woestehoff, S., Dezember, A., & Quas, J.A. (2022). Describing and comparing plea hearings in juvenile and criminal court. Law and Human Behavior, 46, 337-352.
​
Dezember, A., Luna, S., Woestehoff, S., Stoltz, M., Manley, M., Quas, J.A, & Redlich, A.D. (2022). Plea validity in circuit court: Judicial colloquies in misdemeanor vs. felony charges. Psychology, Crime, & Law, 28, 268-288.
Woestehoff, S., Redlich, A.D., Cathcart, E., & Quas, J. (2019). Legal professionals’ perceptions of juvenile engagement in the plea process. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 5, 121-131.​
Investigating and Addressing Racial and Ethnic Disparity in Prosecution and Punishment: A Multi-Site Analysis
FUNDING AGENCY: Arnold Ventures
PIs: Allison Redlich, Brian Johnson
This project is in collaboration with Professor Brian Johnson (PI; University of Maryland) and Professor Miranda Galvin (Towson University) and funded by Arnold Ventures. There are three research questions: 1) How does the broad exercise of prosecutorial discretion relate to patterns of racial inequality in the justice system?; 2) Are racial disparities generated through similar discretionary processes across jurisdictions?; and 3) To what extent are patterns of disparity driven by crime severity? Questions will be addressed by examining the severity and number of initial charges, the magnitude and type of charge reductions, which cases are dismissed (and, when possible, why), and whether and how these processes vary by defendant race and ethnicity. In addition, the project team will examine various types of alternative/diversionary dispositions, such as the use of Probation before Judgment, a common diversion option that sidesteps the collateral consequences of a conviction, and explore racial differences in guilty pleas and plea discounts, and final sentences. We are collaborating with three States' Attorneys Offices in Maryland.
Past Funded Research Projects
The Role of Communication in Plea Bargaining and Plea Decision-Making
FUNDING AGENCY: The National Science Foundation
PI: Mary Catlin
In this project, we test how defense attorneys' competing professional motivations and the plea "telephone" game might impact the plea process and ultimate plea decision. Study 1 is an experimental survey with actual defense attorneys who have been prompted to either do their best for the hypothetical client or maintain a good relationship with the hypothetical prosecutor before reviewing discovery and presenting the plea offer to their client. Study 2 will involve an experimental hypothetical plea negotiation paradigm with mock defense attorneys and mock defendants. This project is Mary Catlin’s doctoral dissertation research and is funded by the National Science Foundation, in addition to the American Academy of Forensic Psychology (AAFP) and the Association of Doctoral Programs in Criminology and Criminal Justice (ADPCCJ).​​
Publications
Catlin, M. (2025). The role of communication in plea bargaining and plea decision-making [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. George Mason University.
Defining Coercion During Plea Negotiations
FUNDING AGENCY: The National Science Foundation
PI: Samantha Luna
In this project, we test a theoretical definition of coercion during plea negotiations that was developed by synthesizing philosophical, legal, and psychological theory, and examining third party assessments of plea coercion claims. Study 1 used an experimental plea negotiation study with defendant participants negotiating with mock, confederate prosecutors and defense attorneys in theoretically coercive and non-coercive situations. Study 2 involved third party observers either watching a recorded plea negotiation in its entirety or watching summarized oral arguments about a theoretically coercive or non-coercive plea negotiation, and then evaluating defendants’ post-sentencing requests to withdraw their plea. This project was Samantha Luna’s doctoral dissertation research.
Publications
Luna, S. (2023). Defining coercion during plea negotiations [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. George Mason University.
​
Luna, S. (2022). Defining coercion: An application in interrogation and plea negotiation contexts. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law.
Examining Alford Pleas and the Presumption of Strong Evidence
FUNDING AGENCY: The National Science Foundation
PI: Amy Dezember
In this study, we investigated Alford please by comparing Alford pleas to traditional guilty pleas. Furthermore, we investigated differences in processing, outcome and evidence strength. Finally, we looked at how the strength of evidence factors into the process of offer, negotiating, and accepting Alford pleas used a mixed methods approach.
Publications
Dezember, A., & Redlich, A. D. (2024). Virginia Alford plea-takers experience harsher outcomes than traditional plea-takers. Law and Human Behavior, 48(4), 262-280.
The Influence of Discovery on True and False Guilty Plea Offers and Decisions
FUNDING AGENCY: Charles Koch Foundation
PIs: Allison Redlich, Samantha Luna
This was a two-phase study. In phase I, we investigated mock prosecutors’ decisions to turn over discovery information and their subsequent plea offers. In phase II, we examined mock guilty and innocent defendants' decisions to plead guilty, and whether their decisions were affected by how much discovery was provided to them.
Publications
Luna, S. & Redlich, A.D. (2021). Unintelligent decision-making? The impact of discovery on defendant plea decisions. Wrongful Conviction Law Review.
​
Luna, S. & Redlich, A.D. (2020). The decision to provide discovery: An examination of policies and guilty pleas. Journal of Experimental Criminology.
Bargaining in the Shadow of the Trial: Exploring the Reach of Evidence Outside the Jury Box
FUNDING AGENCY: The National Institute of Justice
PIs: Shawn Bushway, Allison Redlich, Robert Norris, Shi Yan
This was a two-phase study. In Phase I, we manipulated the presence and combination of three evidence forms and the prior criminal history of the defendant in hypothetical case scenarios administered to national samples of judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys. In Phase II, we partnered with two county DA offices to code the evidentiary and non-evidentiary factors in actual criminal case files.
Publications
Redlich, A.D., Yan, S., Norris, R.J., & Bushway, S.D. (2018). The influence of confessions in guilty pleas and plea discounts. Psychology, Public Policy, and the Law, 24, 147-157.
​
Redlich, A.D., Bushway, S., & Norris, R. (2016). Plea decision-making by attorneys and judges: The impact of legal and extra-legal factors. Journal of Experimental Criminology.
​
Bushway, S., Redlich, A.D., & Norris, R. (2014). An explicit test of plea bargaining in the “shadow of the trial”. Criminology, 52, 723-754.
Creating and Transferring Knowledge on Guilty Pleas
FUNDING AGENCY: The National Science Foundation
PIs: Allison Redlich, Catherine Bonventre, Reveka Shteynberg
This was also a two-phase project. In the first phase, state and county-level tender-of-plea forms were obtained, and subjected to detailed content and comprehensibility analyses. In the second phase, a laboratory study involving youth and young adults was conducted. Guilt/innocence and jail time were manipulated. The primary dependent variables were willingness to accept a plea, and plea rationales.
Publications
Redlich, A. D. & Shteynberg, R. (2016). To plead or not to plead: A comparison of juvenile and adult true and false plea decisions. Law and Human Behavior.
​
Redlich, A.D. & Bonventre, C. (2015). Content and comprehensibility of adult and juvenile tender-of-plea forms: Implications for knowing, intelligent, and voluntary guilty pleas. Law and Human Behavior, 39, 162-176.