NCJ Number
27619
Journal
University of Pennsylvania Law Review Volume: 103 Issue: 8 Dated: (JUNE 1955) Pages: 1057-1087
Date Published
1955
Length
31 pages
Annotation
SUMMARY OF AN OPERATIONAL STUDY OF THE PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CONDUCTED IN THE EARLY 1950'S; IT FOCUSES ON THE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT'S FLOW THROUGH SUCH PRETRIAL STAGES AS GRAND JURY AND PRELIMINARY HEARING.
Abstract
THE STUDY ALSO EXAMINES THE EFFECT ON THAT FLOW OF THE PROSECUTOR'S DISCRETIONARY POWERS, INCLUDING THE POWER TO ENTER A NOLLE PROSEQUI. THE AUTHOR FOUND THAT WITHIN THE STATUTORY FRAMEWORK CONSIDERED, THE APPLICATION OF THE CRIMINAL LAW TO INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS IS SUBJECT TO A VAST AMOUNT OF DISCRETION IN THE PROSECUTOR TO EFFECT A FLEXIBLE SYSTEM OF PROSECUTION. TO PROTECT THE ACCUSED, SOME IMMEDIATE RESTRICTIONS ARE IMPOSED. THE MAGISTRATE AND THE GRAND JURY FUNCTION AS SOME PROTECTION AGAINST UNFOUNDED ACCUSATIONS AND OVERZEALOUS PROSECUTORS. THERE ARE STATUTORY REMEDIES TO PROTECT AGAINST DELAYS IN ACCUSATION OR TRIAL AND SAFEGUARDS AGAINST THE MALICIOUS AND INEFFICIENT PROSECUTOR. HOWEVER, THE EFFICACY OF MANY OF THESE RESTRICTIONS, THE AUTHOR CONCLUDES, IS AT BEST OPEN TO QUESTION. THE AUTHOR SUGGESTS REFORM MEASURES TO CURE THE DEFECTS AND INEFFICIENCIES OF THE SANCTIONS OF REMOVAL AND THE POWERS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THUS MAKING THOSE EXISTING SANCTIONS AGAINST ABUSE OF PROSECUTOR'S DISCRETION MORE EFFECTIVE. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)