TRIAL COURTS AS ORGANIZATIONS: A Critique and Synthesis

This article has two purposes: (1) to suggest that the informal workgroup is the most appropriate concept from organization theory to explain both participant behavior occurring in criminal trial courts and trial court outputs; and (2) to use the informal workgroup framework to structure the findings generated by previous studies of trial courts. The informal workgroup proves to be a useful way to account for the disjuncture between the adversarial expectations and regularized individual behavior patterns researchers find in criminal trial courts. Furthermore, this concept provides a vehicle to explain the development of uniformities in output such as a classification of criminals, the categorization of crime, and sentencing yardsticks. The conclusion discusses the implications of the informal workgroup for efforts aimed at court reform.     

Criminal culpability: The possibility of a general theory

In this article, I try to do two things. First I analyse critically the suggestion that the principles of criminal culpability can be explained by reference to a single, all-encompassing concept, such as “defiance of the law”. I then go on to explain the foundations of criminal culpability by reference to three interlocking theories — the capacity theory, the character theory, and the agency theory. I conclude that even these three theories may not be sufficient to explain the complex structure of culpability, which is shaped as much by shared cultural understanding as by moral theory.     

Worthy of Justice: A Veterans Treatment Court in Practice

This article examines the purpose and practice of a Veterans Treatment Court (VTC), a new type of problem-solving court designed to connect qualifying former service members in the criminal justice system with social services. While existing studies of VTCs explain these courts by focusing on veterans' distinct needs or deservingness based on their military service, this article argues that these courts are being created because of societal beliefs about veteran worth. By revealing how court staff, participants, and volunteers in one VTC invoke beliefs about veteran worth, the findings of this study show that VTCs link worth to veteran identity, leaving participants suspended in conflicting notions of state and individual responsibility for criminal behavior.     

Crime and Expected Punishment: Changes in Perceptions at the Age of Criminal Majority

This paper assesses whether perceived punishment severity changesdiscontinuously when an individual becomes an adult in the eyesof the courts. I find that the perceived chance of jail increasesby 5.2 percentage points at the age of criminal majority, whichis over and above the general effect of aging. The magnitudeof this subjective change in the chance of jail at the age ofmajority appears to be substantially smaller than that foundin objective data. Finally, a reduced-form analysis of whetherself-reported criminal behavior changes discontinuously at theage of criminal majority finds little consistent evidence ofdeterrence.     

When Culture Means Gender: Issues of Cultural Defence in the English Courts

The use of cultural defence has been much discussed in the American context and has figured as one of the areas of concern in feminist assessments of multiculturalism. This paper examines two categories of cases from the English courts, those where cultural context has been seen as significant in interpreting the actions of female defendants, and those where 'culture' is invoked to explain severe acts of violence against women. It argues that cultural arguments become available to female defendants mainly when they conform to stereotypical images of the subservient non-Western wife. They have not, on the whole, been successfully employed by male defendants to mitigate crimes against women, though there are troubling exceptions. The larger problem is that mainstream culture itself promotes a gendered understanding of agency and responsibility, as when it perceives men as understandably incensed by the sexual behaviour of their women, or women as less responsible for their actions because of the influence of men. The conclusion is that the uses and abuses of cultural defence highlight issues that have wider provenance, for it is when cultural arguments resonate with mainstream conventions that they have proved most effective.     

Contingent-Fee Lawyers and Their Clients: Settlement Expectations, Settlement Realities, and Issues of Control in the Lawyer-Client Relationship

One hallmark of Herb Jacob's analyses of criminal courts—extensive consideration of the interaction among actors–was less pronounced in his work on civil justice, which was more focused on institutions and the politics behind the laws that those institutions administered. In the research I report here, my emphasis is squarely on the actors in the civil justice process: the relationship between contingency-fee lawyers and clients, and how that relationship plays out in the settlement process. In Felony Justice, Herb, and his coauthor James Eisenstein, focus on the courtroom workgroup as a case-processing (and, largely, case-settling) machine; clients are relatively peripheral. In my account, clients, both current and future, are extremely important in how the lawyer works to settle cases. In the criminal court workgroup, lawyers do not worry about where future clients will come from because police secure them. In contrast, the contingency-fee lawyer has constant concerns about future clients, and I argue, this concern provides a control over lawyers that prior analyses of the contingency fee have largely missed. This dynamic also may explain why the courtroom workgroups, or court communities, found in the criminal courts do not appear to exist in the civil justice system.     

Punishment, Socially Deprived Offenders, and Democratic Community

The idea that victims of social injustice who commit crimes ought not to be subject to punishment has attracted serious attention in recent legal and political philosophy. R. A. Duff has argued, for example, a states that perpetrates social injustice lacks the standing to punish victims of such injustice who commit crimes. A crucial premiss in his argument concerns the fact that when courts in liberal society mete out legitimate criminal punishments, they are conceived as acting in the name of all citizens—on behalf of the whole political community. Resisting this premiss, Peter Chau has suggested that courts ought to be conceived as acting only in the name of “just citizens”: citizens who cannot be plausibly seen as having contributed to distributive injustice. When conceived in this way, Chau argues, courts can no longer plausibly be regarded as lacking standing to punish. This article uses the debate between Duff and Chau to explain why the question of whether to punish socially deprived offenders can only be answered adequately when connected to broader concerns of democratic theory. Specifically, it argues that Chau’s proposal is not available within the context of the kind of political community upon which (Duff rightly believes) a system of liberal criminal law depends for its justification and maintenance: a community in which citizens see the law as embodying shared norms whose specific demands they disagree about. State officials are morally permitted to see themselves as acting on behalf of a subset of the citizenry, I argue, only in circumstances of democratic crisis: circumstances in which a moral community can no longer be plausibly said to exist.     

Patronage and Rationalization: Reform to Criminal Procedure and the Lower Courts in Chile

This article analyzes how the lower criminal courts in Chile transitioned from an inquisitorial to an adversarial justice system between 2000 and 2005 as part of the Criminal Procedure Reform. Drawing on the frame analysis of the street‐level bureaucracy and judicial ethnography, I examine the transition between two different types of judicial bureaucracy from the perspective of the actors who implemented the reform. The study is based on in‐depth interviews with officials and judges of both inquisitorial and adversarial courts, administrative managers of the new courts, and actors who designed the administrative reorganization of lower criminal courts. The study involved a three‐month, weekly observation in an inquisitorial court in Santiago de Chile. The article emphasizes the specificity of the Chilean judiciary, where both inquisitorial and adversarial criminal courts still coexist.     

Beyond Therapy: Problem‐Solving Courts and the Deliberative Democratic State

Problem‐solving courts (drug courts, community courts, domestic violence courts, and mental health courts), unlike traditional courts, attempt to get at the root of the individual and social problems that motivate criminal behavior. Theoretical understandings of problem‐solving courts are mostly Foucauldian; proponents argue that these new institutions employ therapeutic techniques that encourage individuals to self‐engineer in ways that subtly increase state power. The Foucauldian approach captures only some elements of problem‐solving courts and does not fully theorize the revolution in justice that these courts present. Problem‐solving courts, domestic violence courts in particular, orient not just around individual change but also around social change and cultural transformation. Combining the Foucauldian idea of a therapeutic state (as developed by James Nolan) with an understanding of the deliberative democratic mechanisms of larger‐scale structural transformation (found in Habermas and others) leads to a more balanced and empirically open orientation to the actual motivations, goals, and achievements of problem‐solving courts.     

Beyond the Courtroom Workgroup: Caseworkers as the New Satellite of Social Control

Many jurisdictions nationwide are faced with overcrowded jails, backlogged court dockets, and high rates of recidivism for mostly nonviolent offenders. To address these complex problems, law enforcement officials have institutionalized alternatives to incarceration programs, including work furloughs, electronic monitoring, and treatment courts. These recent trends in legal reform are designed to reduce and prevent criminal behavior by helping to reintegrate defendants back into their local communities. One aspect that has been largely unaddressed in prior research is that jail-alternative programs are primarily staffed by caseworkers with outside nonprofit agencies. This important group of nonlegal actors plays a pivotal role in crafting decisions to divert low-level offenders from the criminal justice system; few studies, however, explore the organizational contexts surrounding caseworkers' everyday decision-making practices. In response, I draw upon ethnographic data to analyze the ways that pretrial release caseworkers in a California county evaluate defendants' entitlement to release on their own recognizance. The results of this study suggest that caseworkers exercise discretion beyond the traditional power structure of the courtroom workgroup. I conclude that caseworkers emerge as the new satellite of social control in contemporary courts.     

Business as Usual? Bail Decision Making and “Micro Politics” in an Australian Magistrates Court

Between the 1970s and 1990s, political scientists in the United States pursued a distinctive research program that employed ethnographic methods to study micro politics in criminal courts. This article considers the relevance of this concept for court researchers today through a case study about bail decision making in a lower criminal court in Australia. It describes business as usual in how decisions are made and the provision of pretrial services. It also looks at how traditionalists and reformers understood business as usual, and uses this as a critical concept to make visible micro politics in this court. The case study raises issues about organizational change in criminal courts since the 1990s, since there are fewer studies about plea bargaining and more about specialist or problem‐solving courts. It is suggested that we need a new international agenda that can address change and continuity in criminal courts.     

Affirmed: A Study of Criminal Appeals and Decision-Making Norms in a California Court of Appeal

The work of state intermediate appellate courts is often described as “correcting legal errors” and “supervising” trial courts. But what do these labels mean in practice? This article explores the intermediate appellate process through a study of criminal appeals in a California Court of Appeal. Part I describes the characteristics and dispositions of criminal appeals. Contrary to popular impression, a conviction was reversed in only about 5 percent of these appeals. To explain the low reversal rate, part II draws upon interviews with justices of the Court of Appeal to examine the institutional norms and perspectives guiding the court's decisions. The basic decision norms described by the justices are norms of affirmance: for example, the harmless error rule and the substantial evidence rule incline the court to affirm despite certain legal errors or factual questions. Moreover, the particularistic approach the court typically takes in its decision making apparently sensitizes it to the substantive characteristics prevailing in criminal appeals: the crimes are serious and there is little doubt about factual guilt. The low reversal rate and the analysis of the court's norms suggest that intermediate appellate review of criminal convictions is narrower and more constrained than the “error correction” and “supervision” labels imply. Part III explores the implications of the case study for appellate policy.     

The use of neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom by those accused of criminal offenses in England and Wales

This examination of the extent of the use of neuroscientific evidence in England and Wales identifies 204 reported cases in which such evidence has been used by those accused of criminal offenses during the eight-year period from 2005–12. Based on the number of reported cases found, the use of such evidence appears well established with those accused of criminal offenses utilizing such evidence in approximately 1 per cent of cases in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). Neuroscientific evidence is used to quash convictions, to lead to convictions for lesser offenses and to lead to reduced sentences. In addition, cases are identified where neuroscientific evidence is used to avoid extradition, to challenge bail conditions and to resist prosecution appeals against unduly lenient sentences. The range of uses identified is wide: including challenging prosecution evidence as to the cause of death or injury, challenging the credibility of witnesses and arguing that those convicted were unfit to plead, lacked mens rea or were entitled to mental condition defenses. The acceptance of such evidence reflects the willingness of the courts in England and Wales to hear novel scientific argument, where it is valid and directly relevant to the issue(s) to be decided. Indeed, in some of the cases the courts expressed an expectation that structural brain scan evidence should have been presented to support the argument being made.     

The Effects of Changes to Legal Aid on Lawyers' Professional Identity and Behaviour in Summary Criminal Cases: A Case Study

This article explores the effects of changes to legally aided representation on criminal cases in magistrates' courts according to data collected in an area of south‐east England. I consider the political factors that motivated changes to legal aid and suggest how these issues affecting lawyers' understanding of their role, and how that understanding affects the relationships between defendants, lawyers, and the magistrates' courts. I argue that the research indicates a potential relation between solicitors' risk‐taking behaviour in obtaining funding and the reintroduction of means testing: remuneration rates affect the service that defendants receive and the reintroduction of means testing decreased efficiency in summary criminal courts. Ultimately, I argue that changes to legal aid funding have increased lawyers' uncertainty about their role, leaving them torn between acting efficiently and providing a good level of service.     

The Cultural Defense

Because of immigration in the West, increased cultural diversity poses a variety of problems for the criminal justice system. This paper examines whether a so-called "cultural defense" ought to be allowed as a freestanding defense to a criminal charge. Such a defense would "negate or mitigate criminal responsibility where acts are committed under a reasonable good-faith belief in their propriety, based on the actor's cultural heritage or tradition." The cultural defense, as a formal defense, and the use of cultural evidence in order to buttress one of the traditional defenses, are distinguished. Three cases are discussed to illustrate the issues. The possible similarity of the cultural defense to an ignorance or mistake of law defense is then considered. The latter is accepted by such theorists as Gunther Arzt and George P. Fletcher and also apparently in German law, but it is rejected by Jerome Hall on the ground that it undermines the objectivity of the criminal law. The similarity, however, is shown not to hold. It is concluded that a freestanding cultural defense should not be allowed.     

Damaska and the Faces of International Criminal Justice

Mirjan Damaka 's scholarly publications provide important insightsfor the analysis of systems of criminal justice at the internationallevel. This is particularly true for his major book: The Facesof Justice and State Authority – A Comparative Approachto the Legal Process. The book develops ideal types, or models,of the structure and the function of government. As far as thestructure of government, the ideal types of hierarchical andcoordinate officialdom are contrasted with one another. Withregard to the function of government in society, two other mutuallyexclusive ideal types are developed: the ideal type of the purelyreactive state and that of the purely activist state. In thepurely reactive state all state activities are essentially aform of dispute resolution between individual citizens. Consequently,all proceedings take the shape of a contest between two parties.In the reactive state, on the other hand, all law is an expressionof state policies. This entails that all proceedings are essentiallyan official inquiry enabling the state to implement its policies.The four ideal types call for several observations, one of thembeing that, at the international level, there is no authoritythat can be compared to a state. Setting up international criminal courts requires choices withregard to the structure and function of authority. Internationalhuman rights instruments provide no guidance as to the natureof the choices to be made. In particular, they do not indicatewhether the legal process should be structured as a contestbetween two parties or as an official inquiry. The same is truefor empirical evidence. An analysis of the structures of authority in internationalcriminal courts reveal that they represent hybrids of the hierarchicaland the coordinate ideal types of officialdom. The fact thatthese courts are unitary courts has a profound effect on evidentiaryarrangements. The most important issue raised by the exposition of ideal typesof The Faces of Justice concerns the relationship between thegoals of international criminal justice and the appropriatelegal process to serve their realization. Goals of a conflict-solvingnature are best served by a legal process structured as a contestbetween two parties and goals related to the implementationof policies by a legal process structured as an official inquiry.It is therefore essential to determine what goals are beingpursed by international criminal courts. One may distinguishhere between goals that international systems of justice mayor may not have in common with national systems of criminaljustice. The pursuit of the traditional goals of criminal justicecommon to international and national systems of justice doesnot provide compelling reasons to prefer either a contest modelor an inquest model of the legal process. This is different,however, for the idiosyncratic goals of international criminaljustice that set apart international systems of criminal justicefrom national systems. The pursuit of these goals makes it desirablethat historical facts are established as accurately as is possiblein the given circumstances. They are, therefore, best servedby a legal process that takes the shape of an official inquiry.In the hybrid type of procedure adopted by the ICTY there isinsufficient clarity about the procedural status of the peculiargoals of international criminal justice as well as about theuse of procedural means to pursue them. This entails that itis not really possible to determine whether this hybrid representsa success. Hybrid types of procedure cannot truly exist withoutadopting a view with regard to the impartiality of judges thatis inspired by standards enshrined in international human rightsinstrument rather than those that are characteristic for thelegal process shaped as a contest between two parties.     

PATTERNS IN CRIMINAL ACHIEVEMENT: WILSON AND ABRAHAMSE REVISITED

Even though intense cultural pressures for monetary success and an institutional social structure dominated by the economy are viewed in anomie theory as stimulating criminal motivations and accounting for criminal behavior with an instrumental character, patterns in criminal earnings have not attracted much scholarly and empirical attention. Wilson and Abrahamse's (1992) analysis of Rand's second inmate survey concluded that most inmates interviewed during the survey had overestimated their monthly criminal earnings in an effort to rationalize their poor criminal performances. In this paper, we conduct, using Rand's first survey, a reanalysis of inmates' self-reported monthly earnings. We conclude that meaningful patterns in criminal achievements easily emerge when allowed to do so. These patterns offer a telling story about differential criminal opportunities. Wilson and Abrahamse's emphasis on temporal inconsistency and response bias (boosting past benefits of crime) misrepresents the facts of that story and misjudges those persons agreeing to tell it. It is concluded that for a "criminal subculture" to have any persuasive or binding effect, its participants must be reasonably assured that their chances of making "crime pay" are not so remote as to become unattainable.     

SENTENCING IN CONTEXT: A MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS

Criminal sentencing is, along with arresting and prosecuting, among the most important of formal social control decisions. In this study we use hierarchical modeling to test hypotheses about contextual level influences and cross level interaction effects on local court decisions. Most of the explanatory "action," our analysis shows, is at the individual case level in criminal sentencing. We also find evidence that local contextual features–such as court organizational culture, court caseload pressure, and racial and ethnic composition–affect sentencing outcomes, either directly or in interaction with individual factors. We conclude by discussing theoretical implications of our findings, and how our study points out some dilemmas among civil rights, local autonomy and organizational realities of criminal courts.