Policy and Prosecution

• NCJ Number: 79228
• Author(s): J E Jacoby; L R Mellon; W F Smith
• Date Published: 1982
• Length: 111 pages
• Grant Number(s): 78-NI-AX-0006; 79-NI-AX-0034
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Corporate Author: Bureau of Social Science Research, Inc
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: One of four reports published on Prosecutorial Decisionmaking.

Annotation

A conceptual model for analyzing prosecutor's decisionmaking policy is presented, and the findings of a comparative examination of policies of 10 prosecutors' offices are summarized. Information is also presented from a nationwide survey of 80 urban prosecutors.

Abstract

Through onsite visits to 10 jurisdictions, researchers identified factors important to the selection and implementation of prosecutorial policy as well as the types of policies being established. Factors important in achieving uniform decisionmaking were also isolated. After this qualitative assessment, findings were used to design a nationwide survey of urban prosecutors. The survey's purpose was to determine if prosecutorial styles or policies could be discerned from some of the objective factors identified as important by the onsite visits. Of equal importance, however, was the documentation of the state-of-the-art of prosecution in the United States. Its variations, diversities, and effect on dispositions are presented. The analysis of survey data revealed that diversity abounds among prosecutors' offices as each carves a policy-based operational framework within local criminal justice environmental constraints. The following general principles emerged from both phases of the project: (1) policy choices do exist, and the prosecutor selects one for a variety of reasons; (2) the selection of a specific prosecutorial policy generates the need for organizations and procedures consistent with the policy; (3) conversely, it is possible to be inconsistent in policy implementation, thereby creating an unstable environment; (4) policy effect can be observed in the organization, management, and dispositional characteristics of the office; and (5) policy goals must be considered before it can be determined whether dispositions are fair and uniform. Overall, however, an examination of the proportional distribution of all dispositions as they occur in each of the accusatory routes shows that, despite the diversities that abound in the prosecutorial function, there is an underlying rationality and consistency in the process as a whole. Tabular data are provided, and frequency distributions from the survey and a sample survey instrument are appended.