Bordenkircher v. Hayes
Citation: 434 U.S. 357 (1978)
Facts
Paul Hayes was charged with uttering a forged instrument, carrying a sentence of two to ten years. During plea negotiations, the prosecutor told Hayes that if he did not plead guilty and accept a five-year sentence, the prosecutor would seek a reindictment under Kentucky’s Habitual Criminal Act, which carried a mandatory life sentence. Hayes refused, was reindicted, convicted, and sentenced to life. He challenged the reindictment as unconstitutional vindictiveness.
Issue
Whether a prosecutor’s threat to seek a more serious charge if the defendant refuses to plead guilty constitutes unconstitutional prosecutorial vindictiveness that violates due process.
Holding
The Supreme Court held that the due process clause was not violated. A prosecutor may carry out a threat made during plea negotiations to bring additional charges if the defendant does not plead guilty, as long as the charges are supported by probable cause.
Rule
There is no due process violation when a prosecutor carries out a pre-indictment threat to charge a defendant more seriously if the defendant refuses to plead guilty, so long as the prosecutor has probable cause for the additional charges and the threat is made openly during plea negotiations.
Significance
Bordenkircher is the leading case on the constitutional limits of plea bargaining pressure. It is widely debated for legitimizing coercive charging practices and is central to critiques of the plea bargaining system, including concerns that it effectively punishes defendants who exercise their right to trial.