[18][19] At the time under North Carolina law a conviction of first degree murder automatically brought with it the death penalty, unless the jury recommended otherwise, in which case the defendant would receive a mandatory life sentence.
[18] Alford maintained he was innocent of the crime itself, but feared going to trial because of the capital punishment associated with the charge of first degree murder.
[18] "[T]hat he would not have pleaded except for the opportunity to limit the possible penalty does not necessarily demonstrate that the plea of guilty was not the product of a free and rational choice", said the Supreme Court decision.
"[19] Prosecutors and defense lawyers characterize Alford pleas as a required method of lessening pressure of the nature of the justice process.
"[24] Orange County, North Carolina District Attorney Jim Woodall said that the frequency of Alford pleas is higher with criminal cases involving a charge of a sexual offense, as the defendant does not wish to admit to their family and the public that they were responsible for the crime.
[24] Psychologist Bob Carbo noted that sexual offenders undergoing treatment for their actions after being ordered to so under terms of their Alford plea cause problems because the first step in therapy is to take responsibility for committing the crime.
"[17] Defendants gain the potential benefit of being able to tell possible employers after their conviction in a crime that they maintained their innocence and only pleaded guilty under the Alford doctrine because of the nature of the situation and the evidence presented.
[17] Professor of law at Quinnipiac University and former federal prosecutor Jeffrey Meyer said of the Alford doctrine, "It's part of an idealist vision of a judicial system that it is for the adjudication of truth.