1. Candice was charged with driving while intoxicated after two previous convictions of the same offense. In the state where these offenses occurred, a third offense constitutes a felony punishable by up to five years imprisonment. In correspondence with Candice's counsel, Karla, the prosecution offered a plea bargain where in exchange for a guilty plea, the charge would be reduced to reckless driving, a misdemeanor. The prosecutor agreed to recommend a sentence of no longer than 90 days. Karla neglected to communicate the plea offer to Candice and the offer expired unaccepted.

Candice pleaded guilty to the felony driving while intoxicated charge and was sentenced to 2-4 years in prison. Shortly after sentencing, Candice learned that there was a plea offer that would have let her plead to a misdemeanor and receive no longer than 90 days in jail. Candice appealed her conviction, arguing that she never would have pleaded guilty had she known about the plea offer. She claims her constitutional rights were violated and argues her conviction must be overturned. Please evaluate Candice's constitutional claims on appeal and the likelihood of success of each.

2. An Allen charge is a jury instruction given to a deadlocked jury encouraging the jury to come to a unanimous decision. The name "Allen charge" comes from the Supreme Court case, Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (1896). About half of the U.S. states permit a jury to be given an Allen charge while deadlocked, and the other roughly half of states prohibit a judge giving this charge.

After reviewing the video of a trial judge giving a deadlocked jury and Allen charge and conducting your own research, please provide the best argument in favor of the Allen charge. Next, please provide your best argument against the Allen charge. Finally, please provide your considered and reasoned opinion whether judges in a criminal trial court should be permitted to give the jury an Allen charge or not. Please explain your position in detail.