NCJ Number
66554
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 48 Dated: (NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1957) Pages: 414-430
Date Published
1957
Length
17 pages
Annotation
THIS PAPER SUGGESTS THAT THE MOST EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST CORRUPT LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS IS A FAIR BUT SYSTEMATIC USE OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS FOR MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE.
Abstract
THE PAPER IS PART OF NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL'S SYMPOSIUM ON 'LEGAL METHODS FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF ORGANIZED CRIME.' IT SUGGESTS THAT CIVIL REMOVAL ACTIONS SHOULD BE EMPLOYED ONLY WHERE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION WILL PROBABLY BE UNSUCCESSFUL. USE OF ONE OF THE TWO FORMS OF REMEDIES AGAINST CORRUPT LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS DEPENDS LARGELY ON THE TYPE OF OBLIGATIONS WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN BROKEN--DISCRETIONARY OR MINISTERIAL. THE PUBLIC PROSECUTORS DUTIES ARE LARGELY DISCRETIONARY. HE CAN DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO PROSECUTE, CAN MAKE USE OF BARGAIN AND COMPROMISE, OR CAN ORDER A NOLLE PROSEQUI, BASED ENTIRELY UPON DISCRETION. THE POLICE OFFICER HAS MORE MINISTERIAL OBLIGATIONS. SOME DISCRETION IS AVAILABLE IN MANPOWER ALLOCATION, BUT MOST OF THE DUTIES CONSIST OF CARRYING OUT ORDERS. CIVIL REMEDIES AGAINST CORRUPT OFFICIALS ARE MORE WIDELY USED THAN CRIMINAL INDICTMENTS. THEY ARE MORE FLEXIBLE AND DO NOT REQUIRE PROOF OF A CRIME FOR INITIATION. THERE ARE THREE RELEVANT TYPES OF CIVIL ACTIONS--PERSONAL REMOVAL ACTIONS (EITHER EXECUTIVE OR JUDICIAL REMOVAL), QUO WARRANTO PROCEEDINGS, AND PROCEEDINGS TO REMOVE THE PROSECUTOR'S NAME FROM THE ROLLS OF THE COURT. THEY ARE USEFUL IN CASES OF INCOMPETENCY OR WHEN SUFFICIENT PROOF OF CORRUPTION IS NOT AVAILABLE. CRIMINAL REMEDIES INVOLVE INDICTMENT FOR MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE BASED ON NONFEASANCE, MALFEASANCE, OR MISFEASANCE. USE OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION IS A MORE POTENT WEAPON AGAINST ORGANIZED CRIME. THE USE OF THE GRAND JURY IS A POTENT WEAPON IN FINDING RESPONSIBILITY FOR CORRUPTION IN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND SHOULD BE USED MORE OFTEN. (TAG)