ISSUES AND MISCONCEPTIONS IN PRISONER LITIGATION: A CRITICAL VIEW*

In the past quarter-century, the number of suits filed by prisoners in federal courts has substantially increased. Critics have borrowed metaphors from ballistics or pathologv to describe this increase as an “epidemic” of “legal pollution” or an “explosion.” The causes of this “hyperlexis,” or excessive litigation, are often attributed to prisoners' attempts to retry their cases once they have lost, or to some psychological attribute of plaintiffs who view litigation as a means of striking back at their keepers. This paper examines several common conceptions of prisoner litigation. National ling data from federal district courts are used to assess the merits of each. The data provide little support for many of the conceptions of and explanations for prisoner suits. It is suggested that prisoners' use of courts may be a form of social resistance to conditions for which there is no other legitimate avenue for relief:     

FACTORS INFLUENCING THE DECISION TO PROSECUTE ECONOMIC CRIME*

Increasing attention to the area of economic crime has raised questions about the abilities of social control agencies to handle this phenomenon effectively. While some research has focused on federal and state enforcement procedures, little is known about how local agencies attempt to deal with this form of crime. This study of a local county economic crime unit utilizes a logit analysis procedure to identify those factors which appear related to the decision to prosecute a case of economic crime. The analysis suggests that cases in which the defendant is an individual, the victim is an organization, and there is more than one victim more frequently result in prosecution. A theoretical framework emphasizing the demand for performance statistics in the face of limited resources is used as a means of explaining the observed pattern in the data.     

CIVIL LITIGATION IN ILLINOIS TRIAL COURTS

This article analyzes civil litigation in Illinois trial courts for the years 1965, 1970, and 1975 using county-level data. Of particular interest is the relationship between civil litigation on one hand and socioeconomic and political culture indicators on the other. Borrowing from the idea of a social development perspective, the analysis emphasizes rural-urban differences. It shows that higher rates of litigation tend to be characteristic of more urbanized, somewhat more culturally modern, and slightly more industrialized counties; and that lower rules tend to be characteristic of more rural, agricultural, and somewhat more traditional counties. Although the data are limited, the analysis also finds some broad rural-urban differences in trial court business. Overall, socioeconomic indicators appear to be more important, with political culture playing only a secondary or tertiary role.     

PROBATION AND PAROLE: PUBLIC RISK AND THE FUTURE OF INCARCERATION ALTERNATIVES*

Jail and prison populations in the United States have continued to grow unabated during the past two decades but crime rates have not declined. Partly in response to the pressures caused by burgeoning correctional populations, the use of alternatives to incarceration has expanded. An ongoing debate centers on the effectiveness of these alternatives. Many criminal justice professionals and some researchers question whether such alternatives seriously restrict the criminal justice system 's ability to incapacitate the active offender. This study deals specifically with two alternatives to incarceration: probation and parole. We examine offender recidivism for a sample of probationers and parolees active in New Orleans, Louisiana, and offer a new approach to addressing the effectiveness issue. Past research has evaluated the effectiveness of alternatives by examining failure rates of diverted offenders. High failure rates, we argue, do not necessarily imply a significant loss of the incapacitative effects of imprisonment. We suggest that a more appropriate measure of the loss of incapacitative effect is the proportion of all offenses committed by persons on probation or parole. Our results suggest that such losses are surprisingly low. The policy implications of our findings are discussed.     

JUDGES' UNEQUAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO EXTRALEGAL DISPARITIES IN IMPRISONMENT*

How do judges in the same court system contribute differentially to extralegal disparities in sentencing? Analyses of felony sentencing in an urban Ohio trial court uncovered two distinct but equal-sized groups of judges that differed in the magnitude of extralegal correlates to imprisonment. Within the group of judges reflecting substantive extralegal correlates to prison sentences, demographic correlates (based on defendants' race, sex, age, and the interaction between them) were more pervasive across judges relative to social demographic correlates (based on education, residence length, and means of financial support). The directions of significant relationships involving a defendant's race, age, and means of support also were inconsistent across judges. These interjudge differences suggest that analyses of cases pooled across judges at either the jurisdiction or the state level might over- or understate the relevance of particular attribution theories of sentencing disparities.     

TO KILL OR NOT TO KILL? LETHAL OUTCOMES IN INJURIOUS ATTACKS*

This research explores the utility of the notion of lethal intent for understanding the outcomes of injurious attacks. We suggest that assailants sometimes kill rather than merely injure victims to avoid either retaliation or criminal prosecution. We hypothesize that, for these tactical reasons, offenders will be more likely to kill when they have no accomplices, when their victims are male or black, and when the victim can identify them. These hypotheses are tested with a merged data set containing information on homicides and nonlethal victimizations involving robbery, rape, and pure assault. The results of multiple logistic regression analyses are largely consistent with theoretical expectations.     

DISCRETION AND DISPARITY UNDER SENTENCING GUIDELINES: THE ROLE OF DEPARTURES AND STRUCTURED SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES*

This article examines the use of alternative sentencing provisions as mechanisms for departing from sentencing guidelines in Washington State and as structural sources of unwarranted sentencing disparity. The authors argue that these structural features of guidelines not only serve as “windows of discretion” through which disparities arise, but they also may encourage disparities by requiring consideration of substantive criteria that disadvantage certain offender groups. The analyses find that males and minority offenders are less likely to receive alternative sentences below the standard range, but that race‐ethnicity and gender have inconsistent effects on departures above the standard range. Theoretical implications of the study are discussed.     

RACIAL DIFFERENCES IN EXPOSURE TO CRIME: THE CITY AND SUBURBS OF CLEVELAND IN 1990*

Do minorities live in higher crime neighborhoods because they lack the class resources to live in better areas, or do racial differences in exposure to crime persist even for blacks and whites of comparable backgrounds? Does living in the suburbs reduce exposure to crime equally for whites and blacks? This study analyzes the determinants of living in local areas with higher or lower crime rates in the Cleveland metropolitan region in 1990. Multivariate models are estimated for whites and blacks, with separate models for city and suburban residents and for violent crime and property crime. Within the city, exposure to both types of crime is strongly related to socioeconomic status for both races, but there are also strong independent effects of race on exposure to violent crime. In the suburbs, whites are concentrated in communities with low crime rates regardless of their social class. There are substantial class differences among suburban nonwhites, but even afluent blacks live in places with a higher violent crime rate than do poor whites.     

解析行政规则对司法的约束力 以行政诉讼为论域

<正>一、引言:问题与思路由于近代民主政治理论和分权学说的功劳,法院裁断纠纷当受立法机关制定的"法律"之约束,基本上成为法学的一项公理。然而,自20世纪上叶"行政国家"兴起之后,大量整饬社会秩序的规则,直接出自行政机关而非立法机关之手,已是勿庸置疑、难以扭转的事实。于是,一个不可回避的问题应运而生:行政机关的合法角色(legitimate role)是执法者而非立法者,其制定的行政规则,对于法院而言,是否具有约束效力呢?答案     

PARTNERS IN THE PROCESS: HOW ATTORNEYS PREPARE THEIR CLIENTS FOR CUSTODY EVALUATIONS AND LITIGATION

We surveyed 113 family attorneys regarding what they did to prepare their clients for child custody evaluations and litigation. Findings revealed that participants saw child custody evaluations as useful on a variety of levels and effective in settling cases. In general, participants reported using professionally acceptable procedures, appropriately advocated for their clients, and dealt with complaints in a reasonable fashion. Referrals to mental health professionals in advance of a child custody evaluation were generally made to provide support rather than for evaluation or test preparation. Work product reviews by mental health consultants were infrequent, although such reviews were seen as highly useful by those who used them. Lastly, participants reported that allegations of parental alienation and domestic violence were often used to gain leverage in custody cases. Implications for practice are discussed for both attorneys and evaluators.