Prosecutorial Decisionmaking - A National Study

• NCJ Number: 79227
• Author(s): J E Jacoby; L R Mellon; E C Ratledge; S H Turner
• Date Published: 1982
• Length: 132 pages
• Grant Number(s): 79-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/; National Institute of Justice/
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: One of four reports published on Prosecutorial Decisionmaking.

Annotation

Prosecutorial policy, its transfer and levels of uniformity and consistency both within and between offices, and the factors used by prosecutors in making discretionary decisions are examined, based on the testing of 855 prosecutors in 15 jurisdictions throughout the United States.

Abstract

A standard set of cases was developed to reflect the wide diversity of cases being presented for prosecution, and a case evaluation form was constructed to capture the priorities given cases for prosecution and expected dispositional information. The areas targeted by the test instruments were the priority rating of cases for prosecution, the expected dispositions as a result of the perceived operations of the judicial system, an indication of the strategies used to bring cases to dispositions, and an expression of the severity of the sanctions desired by the prosecutors. Major findings and conclusions from testing the prosecutors and assistant prosecutors in 15 jurisdictions throughout the United States are presented. Factors of significance in prosecutorial decisionmaking, these factors' relationships to various decisions, and the issues of policy versus policy-free decision factors are identified and discussed. Differences between the responses of the sites as they evaluate the same set of cases are compared. The amount of agreement between the assistants and the chief policymakers in the office is examined, as well as the degree of internal uniformity in decisionmaking among assistants. The difference in decisionmaking within smaller organizational units and among different levels of policy leaders is also examined. The concluding discussion shifts emphasis from measuring agreement among decisionmakers to predicting decisions in individual cases. The primary conclusion is that prosecutors are rational and consistent in decisionmaking, as they follow rules and principles for each major decision area. There is a consistency in prosecutorial decisionmaking that transcends State and local boundaries, policy differences, and criminal justice systems. Tabular data are provided. Samples of the case set and evaluation form are included, as well as a summary of the major characteristics of the participating jurisdictions, a discussion of the analytical methodologies, and the legal-evidentiary variables used in analysis.