The Disappearing Trial 102. Though practice in many jurisdictions within the US has been for prosecutors to require as a condition of the plea deal waivers of the right to appeal on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel, the US Supreme Court has affirmed defendants’ right to make such appeals.103 The cases of Padilla v. Kentucky,104 Lafler v. Cooper105 and Frye v. Missouri106 have affirmed the ability of defendants to appeal against conviction following a plea deal where poor or absent advice from a lawyer has led them either to accept an unfavourable plea deal (in Padilla, in relation to collateral immigration consequences) or where it has led them to proceed to trial against their interests (Lafler and Frye). vi. Involvement of judge in negotiations 103.  In many trial waiver systems, judges take a very limited role in negotiations and in many jurisdictions are prohibited from becoming involved. However this is not universal. In some civil law systems, notably in Germany, trial waiver systems are formed through negotiations involving all parties – defendants, prosecutors, and judges. 104.  Even in adversarial systems where it is typical for judges to play no part in negotiations between the parties, some examples of judicial involvement can be found. In a number of jurisdictions, such as Hong Kong and New Zealand, in which sentencing remains within the discretion of the judge, the parties can seek a sentence indication from the judge prior to agreeing to waive their right to a trial. While not a formal intervention in negotiations, sentence indications nonetheless draw judges into the information-sharing process that informs trial waivers. 105.  Singapore has a particularly developed system of judicial mediation, in which trial waivers (known as “plea agreements”) are negotiated through a formal process called Criminal Case Resolution. This involves a voluntary meeting between the prosecutor and defence, mediated by a senior District Judge, whose role is not to evaluate the case but to facilitate the parties in identifying issues on which agreement can be reached. Any admissions made or contemplated in this meeting are precluded for use as later evidence if a trial waiver is not agreed. 103. Cf. “Memorandum to Federal Prosecutors from James M. Cole, Deputy Attorney General, recommending against the use of such waivers by federal prosecutor”, 2014. Available at https://www.fd.org/docs/select-topics/pleas/memorandum-to-all-federal-prosecutors-from-james-m-cole-deputy-attorney-general-on-waiversof-ineffective-assistance-of-counsel-in-plea-agreements-(10-14-14).pdf?sfvrsn=6. 104. Padilla v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (2010). 105. Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. (2012). 106. Missouri v. Frye, 132 S.Ct. 1399 (2012). 55.