NCJ Number
75942
Journal
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Volume: 423 Dated: (January 1976) Pages: 99-116
Date Published
1976
Length
18 pages
Annotation
The development of the discretionary powers of the public prosecutor is traced, and alternatives for limiting and controlling these powers are discussed.
Abstract
Possessing awesome and almost unlimited discretionary powers, the district attorney is the most important figure in America's modern system of criminal justice administration. These powers stem primarily from the unique fact that the public prosecutor exists in a system which was initially premised on a common law concept of private prosecution, where the victim or a victim's representative arrested the suspect and brought charges in court. The discretion involved in charging and plea-bargaining decisions exemplifies the power granted a civil law official to administer a common law jurisprudence. Some have suggested a return to a form of private prosecution as a means of returning prosecutorial discretion to the people, but the organized bar has strongly opposed this change, and numerous judicial opinions have fought back attempts to allow a measure of private prosecution in the system. The most practical approach to limiting and controlling prosecutorial discretion, therefore, is through systemic adaptations, including statutory mandates detailing prosecutorial responsibilities, tighter professional entry and discipline procedures, a more detailed code of ethics and stricter enforcement measures, judicial review of prosecutorial decisions, and internal guidelines for prosecutors (self-imposed, self-administered, or publicly promulgated). Footnotes are provided.