Quick and dirty

OBJECTIVE: Court proceedings, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic, have increasingly occurred outside the courtroom. Yet little research has examined the format and content of virtual hearings, particularly those that result in a criminal conviction. We compiled a sample of recorded plea hearings (colloquies) to examine how this virtual format might impact the validity of defendant decisions. HYPOTHESES: Given the exploratory nature of this research, we had no a priori hypotheses. METHOD: We searched YouTube for judicial channels to secure recordings of virtual hearings. An initial sample of 340 recordings was obtained; upon further review, 106 recordings were excluded because the most serious initial and final charges were noncriminal civil infractions (providing a study sample of 234). Each hearing was reviewed for variables relating to the characteristics of the hearing (e.g., duration, crime type) and content included (e.g., plea validity assessments-knowingness, intelligence, and voluntariness). RESULTS: Virtual plea colloquies averaged only 3.88 min in length and were often characterized by few efforts to assess their validity. Judges explicitly inquired about the knowingness, intelligence, and voluntariness of each plea relatively infrequently. We also observed great variability in the frequency with which prosecutors, defense attorneys, and even defendants were visible during the proceedings (i.e., had their cameras on). Further, online-related difficulties (e.g., audio disruptions) occurred regularly, yet these disruptions were not associated with longer hearings. CONCLUSIONS: The current research indicates that online plea colloquies are at least as efficient as their in-person counterparts (in terms of average duration), despite added obstacles to their flow (e.g., technological issues). In addition, our findings indicate little consistency in how plea knowingness, intelligence, and voluntariness are ensured virtually, with significant variation observed across judges. Further research is needed to determine the generalizability of these findings and to examine guidelines that could reduce the costs associated with virtual hearings (e.g., soundchecks). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved)

Adjudication · Criminology · Legal psychology · Plea · Political science · Psychoanalysis · Dispute Resolution and Class Actions · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Psychology · Social Psychology

• Who Minds Their Pleas and Queues? Quick and Slow Misdemeanor Pleas Pose Similar Risk of Incarceration

  Open Access•Rebecca Richardson, Miko M Wilford•Criminal Justice and Behavior•2026

  Incluir item