2025•University of Michigan Journal of Law ReformOpen access

Specific Performance of "Unfulfillable" Plea Bargains

Stuart Gasner

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

This article discusses how courts have handled the remedy dilemma presented by unfulfillable plea bargains. Part I analyzes the seminal Supreme Court opinion on the broken plea bargain question, Santobello v. New York. This section concludes that choice-of-remedy is not entirely a matter of lower court discretion. Rather, Santobello delegates to lower courts the authority to develop a law of remedies which conforms to the underlying principles of that decision. Part I also focuses on what courts have done with this mandate, discussing the elements of decision courts have developed to remedy unfulfillable plea bargains. Finally, Part II suggests a model analysis, requiring a presumption of specific performance when the defendant can show detrimental reliance on the unfulfillable bargain.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This article discusses how courts have handled the remedy dilemma presented by unfulfillable plea bargains. Part I analyzes the seminal Supreme Court opinion on the broken plea bargain question, Santobello v. New York. This section concludes that choice-of-remedy is not entirely a matter of lower court discretion. Rather, Santobello delegates to lower courts the authority to develop a law of remedies which conforms to the underlying principles of that decision. Part I also focuses on what courts have done with this mandate, discussing the elements of decision courts have developed to remedy unfulfillable plea bargains. Finally, Part II suggests a model analysis, requiring a presumption of specific performance when the defendant can show detrimental reliance on the unfulfillable bargain.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This article discusses how courts have handled the remedy dilemma presented by unfulfillable plea bargains. Part I analyzes the seminal Supreme Court opinion on the broken plea bargain question, Santobello v. New York. This section concludes that choice-of-remedy is not entirely a matter of lower court discretion. Rather, Santobello delegates to lower courts the authority to develop a law of remedies which conforms to the underlying principles of that decision. Part I also focuses on what courts have done with this mandate, discussing the elements of decision courts have developed to remedy unfulfillable plea bargains. Finally, Part II suggests a model analysis, requiring a presumption of specific performance when the defendant can show detrimental reliance on the unfulfillable bargain.

Key concepts: Plea, Law reform, Political science, Law, Law and economics, Criminology, Psychology, Sociology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Specific Performance of "Unfulfillable" Plea Bargains — Research Paper | ScholarLens