Criminal Justice
540 – Processes and Institutions
Spring Semester 2005
Professor Joseph L. Peterson
Criminal Justice Department
4022A BSB (m/c 141)
Office Hours M 2-4, Th 2-4, and by appointment
Telephone: 996-5262
http://tigger.uic.edu/~joepete/crj540.html
email: joepete@uic.edu
Introduction
This course will examine the critical component agencies and decision-making processes within America’s criminal justice system. Criminal justice is an ever-changing process in which society’s need to maintain public order and safety is balanced by our desire to protect democratic values and the rule of law. Criminal justice is made up of numerous, inter-dependent subsystems, each with its own set of values and objectives. All of these agencies/subsystems have grown in size, scope, and complexity over the past several decades and are dependent on the cooperation of other units to achieve their individual goals. These relationships are also defined by the exchange of resources that affect the choices made by individual decision makers.
For the past two academic years (2003 and 2004), I placed emphasis in the first class of the term on the death penalty, in that (then) Governor George Ryan pardoned four inmates and commuted the sentences of 164 prisoners on death row to life in prison without parole. Ryan’s reason for commuting these sentences is very relevant to this course because he stated he had lost faith in the “capital system”: “Because the Illinois death penalty system is arbitrary and capricious – and therefore immoral – I can no longer tinker with the machinery of death.” The Governor’s Commission on Capital Punishment and its Report issued in April 2002 contained 85 recommendations for reforming the capital punishment system. In November 2003, Illinois State lawmakers passed legislation enacting a number of reforms, including prohibiting prosecutors from seeking the death penalty in cases resting solely on the testimony of a single eyewitness, jailhouse informant, or accomplice. While not a required text for this course, the Commission Report remains an excellent resource for students in examining the decision making process that determines the flow of homicide/death penalty cases through the judicial system.
I also want to point you in the direction of the National Institute of Justice’s (NIJ) What's New web page the first evening of class. As you scroll through that site you will read about a number of sources that will inform you about current criminal justice research and publications – from the use of DNA in solving crimes, reducing gun violence, violence against women, and toward safe and orderly schools. While Chicago touts its lowest number of homicides (~450) in over forty years, the Chicago Tribune recently highlighted the increase in the homicide rate in DuPage County in 2004 and how much of that increase was attributable to intimate partner violence. There are a number of things that potential intimate partner victims can do to minimize their risk, but there are also policies and practices of criminal justice agencies that help. I will also give students an overview of important changes in the criminal justice system over the past year that affect the manner in which crimes are recognized, reported, and administered, and offenders are adjudicated, punished, and returned to their communities.
One of the required texts for this course is by Cole et al. and outlines the concepts of discretion, resource dependence, sequential tasks, and case filtering, all of which interact in determining which laws are enforced, which offenders are processed, which defendants go free, and which are punished. These choices have implications for our justice system's goal of seeing that the accused receives the "due process of law". Our justice system has become increasingly politicized and punitive and, in fact, has had a devastating impact on many of our inner city communities. Viewed longitudinally, the amount of crime, the complexity of the criminal justice system, and the use of data/scholarship in our field have grown tremendously over the past half century. We will use Cole et al. to define those institutions and processes on which we will focus attention, and the NIJ readings as a means to probe more deeply into current research in the field that examines critical criminal justice decision points
Required Texts
There are two required texts for the course:
The Criminal Justice System: Politics and Policies, Ninth Edition, (2004) by George F. Cole, Marc G. Gertz, and Amy Bunger, Wadsworth-Thomson Learning, Belmont, CA.
and
Criminal
Justice 2000, (2000) Volumes 1-4, National Institute of Justice,
Washington, D.C.
The Nature of Crime: Continuity and Change, Vol. 1, NCJ 182408
Boundary Changes in Criminal Justice Organizations, Vol. 2, NCJ 182409
Policies, Processes, and Decisions of the Criminal Justice System, Vol.
3, NCJ 182410
Measurement and Analysis of Crime and Justice, Vol. 4, NCJ 182411
The Cole et al. text is available in the UIC Bookstore
and the Criminal Justice 2000 volumes may be obtained by calling NCJRS at (800) 851-3420.
The chapters in the four volume set can also be read on line
at Criminal
Justice 2000
Student Evaluation
Category Possible Points
Weekly
Readings and
Discussion 30
Oral
Presentation
10
Research
Paper
Draft
10
Final 30
Final
Examination 20
Total
100
Research Paper
In Cole et al.’s discussion of the importance of several attributes that characterize the criminal justice system – discretion, resource dependence, sequential tasks, and filtering – he, also, speaks of the constant tension between crime control and liberty (due process). Other things being equal, the system principally gives priority attention to criminal cases of greater seriousness and those showing the strongest evidence of the defendant’s guilt. The disposition of cases in the justice process is also marked by the progressive screening of cases, considerable administrative discretion, and is shaped by interpersonal relationships between actors. “At each decision making level, actors in the judicial system are able to determine which types of crime will come to official notice, which kinds of offenders will be processed, and how enthusiastically a conviction will be sought.” (Cole et al., p. 7-8)
Cole leads the reader through the criminal justice process:
1. Police officer invokes the criminal process, decides if to use force, and makes an arrest
2. Prosecutor evaluates the evidence against the suspect, decides if and what to charge, recommends pretrial release/detention, plea bargains or tries the case, and recommends a sentence
3. Defense attorney strives to protect liberty and rights of the client, forces state to prove its case, plea bargains, prepares a vigorous defense and seeks acquittal, and advises his/her client accordingly
4. Judiciary rules on evidence, decides to hold/release defendant for trial, assigns counsel, determines guilt or innocence, approves plea bargains, and issues sentence (probation/incarceration)
5. Correctional institution decides to classify, hold, discipline offender, and release offender (reentry)
Your assignment is first to create a case scenario of your choosing that includes a complete description of a criminal offense, the community in which it occurs, the pertinent characteristics of the victim and the offender. You will also need to briefly describe the basic features of the justice system that will be processing the case. (You will want to describe the case and the key actors so as to illustrate the case processing decisions you will emphasize in your paper.) Then, given these beginning parameters, you are to describe that offender’s likely path through the criminal justice process, identifying (and weighing) those factors and characteristics of the offense that will likely decide the progress and outcome of the case. Your “case” should include movement through (at least) the above five levels. You should also identify any other factors that will affect the processing of your case through the justice system. The factors you select should be based on the most definitive and convincing research you can find on that decision point in the published literature. At each of these stages, students are to cite that literature that best explains what drives the principal decision making in these agencies. You should also consider the relevant law, public policy and contemporary politics that might affect your case.
Assignment Schedule
Date Week Assigned Readings Student
1/13
I Discussion
of Syllabus, Resources, Course
Reqs.
All
What's New
The
Death Penalty in Illinois
“Real Justice I” PBS Video
1/20 II Cole, “Politics and the Admin of Justice,” pp. 1-70.
CJ 2000, Vol. 4, Duffee et al., "Measurement and Analysis of Crime
and Justice: An Introductory Essay," pp. 1-31
“Real Justice I” PBS Video (continued)
1/27
III
CJ 2000, Vol. 1, LaFree et al., “The Changing Nature of Crime in
America,” pp. 1-49; Lyons and Scheingold, “The Politics of Crime
and Justice,” pp. 103-149; Ousey, “Explaining Regional and Urban
Variation in Crime: A Review of the Literature,” pp. 261-308.
CJ 2000, Vol. 2, Friel, “A Century of Changing Boundaries,” pp. 1-17.
2/3
IV
CJ 2000, Vol. 3, Bazemore, "Community Justice and A Vision of
Collective Efficacy: The Case of Restorative Conferencing," pp.
225-297;
CJ 2000, Vol. 2, Karp and Clear, “Community Justice: A Conceptual Framework,” pp. 323-368.
2/10 V Cole, “Police,” pp. 71-167.
CJ 2000, Vol. 3, Greene, "Community Policing in America: Changing
the Nature, Structure, and Function of the Police," pp. 299-370;
2/17
VI
CJ 2000, Vol. 2, Forst, “The Privatization and Civilianization of Policing,”
pp. 19-79; Richman, “The Changing Boundaries Between Federal
Local Law Enforcement,” pp. 81-111;
CJ 2000, Vol. 4, Maguire and Uchida, "Measurement and Explanation in
the Comparative Study of American Police Organizations," pp. 491-557.
2/24 VII TBA, AAFS Week (Professor out of town at professional meeting)
3/3 VIII Cole, “The Adversarial Process,” pp. 169-250.
3/10 IX Cole, “Courts,” pp. 251-308.
3/17
X CJ
2000, Vol. 3, Spohn, "Thirty Years of Sentencing Reform: The
Quest for a Racially Neutral Sentencing Process," pp. 427-501;
Zatz, "The Convergence of Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Class on
Court Decisionmaking: Looking Toward the 21st Century,
pp. 503-552.
3/24 SPRING BREAK
3/31 XI Cole, “Corrections,” pp. 309-434.
CJ 2000, Vol. 2, Smith, “The Governance of Corrections …,”
pp. 113-166;
CJ 2000, Vol. 3, Lynch and Sabol, "Prison Use and Social Control,"
pp. 7- 44; Lurigio and Swartz, "Changing the Contours of the Criminal
Justice System to Meet the Needs of Persons with Serious Mental
Illnesses, pp. 45-108; Cullen and Gendreau, "Assessing Correctional
Rehabilitation:
Policy, Practice, and Prospects, pp. 109-175;
4/7
XII
CJ 2000, Vol. 1, Harris et al., “A Century of Juvenile Justice,”
pp. 359-425. CRJ 2000, Vol. 2, Butts and Mitchell, “Brick by
Brick: Dismantling the Border Between Juvenile and Adult
Justice,” pp. 167-213;
Draft Research Paper Due
4/14 XIII Cole, “Policy Perspectives,” pp. 435-517.
4/21
XIV
CRJ 2000, Vol. 4, Fisher and Cullen, "Measuring the Sexual Victimization
of
Women: Evolution, Current Controversies, and Future Research,"
pp. 317-390.
4/28
XV
Final
Research Paper Due
Student Paper Presentations
5/5 Final Exam