NCJ Number
13767
Journal
University of Cincinnati Law Review Volume: 41 Issue: 3 Dated: (1972) Pages: 623-668
Date Published
1972
Length
46 pages
Annotation
COMPARISON OF PRE-1970 PROCEDURE IN WHICH A CASE WAS HEARD IMMEDIATELY UNLESS A CONTINUANCE WAS REQUESTED WITH THE POST-1970 ONE IN WHICH IMMEDIATE DISPOSITION OCCURS ONLY IF A GUILTY OR NO CONTEST PLEA IS ENTERED.
Abstract
A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS WAS MADE OF DOCKET SHEET DATA FOR THE YEAR PRIOR TO AND THE YEAR SUBSEQUENT TO THE ADOPTION OF THE NEW SYSTEM. ADDITIONALLY, PERSONAL INTERVIEWS WERE CONDUCTED WITH PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE DAY-TO-DAY OPERATION OF CRIMINAL COURT. THE INTERVIEWEES-JUDGES, PROSECUTORS, POLICE OFFICERS, BONDSMEN, AND ATTORNEYSWERE ALL ASSOCIATED WITH THE SYSTEM LONG ENOUGH TO BE FAMILIAR WITH THE OLD AND NEW PROCEDURES. A SECOND GROUP OF INTERVIEWEES WERE THOSE MOST IMMEDIATELY AFFECTED BY THE CHANGE IN METHODS-THE DEFENDANTS. THE NEW SYSTEM WAS ADOPTED FOR THREE REASONS: TO ALLEVIATE WITNESS INCONVENIENCE, TO DECREASE POLICE PAYROLL EXPENDITURES, AND TO IMPROVE COURTROOM CONDITIONS IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE MORE JUST RESULTS. NOT ONLY IS COMPLAINANT AND WITNESS INCONVENIENCE NOT BEING ALLEVIATED AT THE PRESENT TIME BUT THE COMPLAINANT'S PRESENCE AT THE ACCUSED'S ARRAIGNMENT PRODUCES CONGESTION IN THE COURTROOM BECAUSE THE FACILITIES ARE STILL NOT ADEQUATE TO ACCOMMODATE THE PEOPLE PRESENT AT EACH SESSION OF CRIMINAL COURT. IN ADDITION, A COMPARISON OF THE ULTIMATE RESULTS UNDER THE OLD AND NEW SYSTEMS DEMONSTRATES THAT THE NEW SYSTEM IS NOT YIELDING ULTIMATE RESULTS THAT DIFFER SIGNIFICANTLY FROM THOSE ATTAINED BEFORE THE CHANGES WERE INSTITUTED. LONGER WORKHOUSE TERMS ARE HOWEVER BEING IMPOSED UPON DEFENDANTS UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM. IT CANNOT BE ASCERTAINED WHETHER TAX SAVINGS HAVE ACCRUED SINCE THE PRESENCE OF THE ARRESTING OFFICER AT THE ACCUSED'S ARRAIGNMENT WAS DROPPED AS A REQUIREMENT, SINCE, AT THE SAME TIME THAT THE NEW ARRAIGNMENT SYSTEM WENT INTO EFFECT, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ABOLISHED OVERTIME PAY FOR COURT APPEARANCES. THE ONLY OTHER CHARACTERISTIC THAT SHARPLY DISTINGUISHES THE NEW SYSTEM FROM THE OLD IS THE DIFFERENCE IN THE NUMBER OF CASES THAT ARE DISPOSED OF AT THE ACCUSED'S FIRST APPEARANCE. UNDER THE OLD SYSTEM, 72.5 PERCENT OF ALL CASES WERE HEARD TO CONCLUSION IMMEDIATELY BUT UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM, THE IMMEDIATE CONCLUSION OF A CASE OCCURS IN ONLY 48.2 PERCENT OF THE CASES. THIS DELAY IS CAUSED BY THE AUTOMATIC CONTINUANCES REQUIRED AFTER A NOT GUILTY PLEA IS ENTERED. IN EFFECT, THE NEW SYSTEM PUNISHES THE ACCUSED WHO ENTERS A PLEA OF NOT GUILTY BY OCCASIONING A LOSS OF WAGES OR A STAY IN JAIL. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT)