重塑美国起诉制度

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
R. Wright
{"title":"重塑美国起诉制度","authors":"R. Wright","doi":"10.1086/688463","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"American prosecutors operate within legal and practical limits, just like any other public officials within a democratic form of government. Those limits are more anemic for prosecutors than for other criminal justice officials; they have also become less effective over time. The prosecutorial function can be reimagined with more effective legal, institutional, and internal cultural constraints that would produce responsive prosecutorial services: that is, prosecutors who respond to legal standards, to public safety local priorities, to input from other criminal justice actors, and to the lessons of experience. This effort to make prosecutors more responsive to other institutions and public sentiment runs counter to ideals in most other Western countries where the objective is a professionalized and insulated prosecutorial service. A more responsive prosecutor, however, is necessary in the United States because of the strong tradition of broad criminal codes and the ingrained expectations that prosecutors must serve justice and not just evaluate the legal sufficiency of individual cases. The prosecutor’s sense of justice—an essential supplement to the rule of law in the American context—must take shape within institutional checks and balances, guided by democratic priorities, and not just by the prosecutor’s individual morality.","PeriodicalId":51456,"journal":{"name":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","volume":"46 1","pages":"395 - 439"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/688463","citationCount":"25","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reinventing American Prosecution Systems\",\"authors\":\"R. Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/688463\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"American prosecutors operate within legal and practical limits, just like any other public officials within a democratic form of government. Those limits are more anemic for prosecutors than for other criminal justice officials; they have also become less effective over time. The prosecutorial function can be reimagined with more effective legal, institutional, and internal cultural constraints that would produce responsive prosecutorial services: that is, prosecutors who respond to legal standards, to public safety local priorities, to input from other criminal justice actors, and to the lessons of experience. This effort to make prosecutors more responsive to other institutions and public sentiment runs counter to ideals in most other Western countries where the objective is a professionalized and insulated prosecutorial service. A more responsive prosecutor, however, is necessary in the United States because of the strong tradition of broad criminal codes and the ingrained expectations that prosecutors must serve justice and not just evaluate the legal sufficiency of individual cases. The prosecutor’s sense of justice—an essential supplement to the rule of law in the American context—must take shape within institutional checks and balances, guided by democratic priorities, and not just by the prosecutor’s individual morality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51456,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"395 - 439\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1086/688463\",\"citationCount\":\"25\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/688463\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crime and Justice-A Review of Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/688463","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

摘要

美国检察官在法律和实践的范围内运作,就像民主政府中的任何其他公职人员一样。对于检察官来说,这些限制比其他刑事司法官员更为薄弱;随着时间的推移,它们的效果也越来越差。检察职能可以在更有效的法律、体制和内部文化约束下重新构想,从而产生反应灵敏的检察服务:即检察官对法律标准、公共安全地方优先事项、其他刑事司法行为者的投入和经验教训作出回应。这种让检察官对其他机构和公众情绪更有反应的努力与大多数其他西方国家的理想背道而驰,这些国家的目标是建立专业化和绝缘的检察服务。然而,在美国,有必要任命一位反应更积极的检察官,因为有着广泛的刑法典的强大传统,而且人们根深蒂固地期望检察官必须伸张正义,而不仅仅是评估个别案件的法律充分性。检察官的正义感——美国法治的重要补充——必须在制度制衡的范围内形成,以民主优先事项为指导,而不仅仅是检察官的个人道德。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reinventing American Prosecution Systems
American prosecutors operate within legal and practical limits, just like any other public officials within a democratic form of government. Those limits are more anemic for prosecutors than for other criminal justice officials; they have also become less effective over time. The prosecutorial function can be reimagined with more effective legal, institutional, and internal cultural constraints that would produce responsive prosecutorial services: that is, prosecutors who respond to legal standards, to public safety local priorities, to input from other criminal justice actors, and to the lessons of experience. This effort to make prosecutors more responsive to other institutions and public sentiment runs counter to ideals in most other Western countries where the objective is a professionalized and insulated prosecutorial service. A more responsive prosecutor, however, is necessary in the United States because of the strong tradition of broad criminal codes and the ingrained expectations that prosecutors must serve justice and not just evaluate the legal sufficiency of individual cases. The prosecutor’s sense of justice—an essential supplement to the rule of law in the American context—must take shape within institutional checks and balances, guided by democratic priorities, and not just by the prosecutor’s individual morality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Crime and Justice-A Review of Research
Crime and Justice-A Review of Research CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Crime and Justice: A Review of Research is a refereed series of volumes of commissioned essays on crime-related research subjects published by the University of Chicago Press. Since 1979 the Crime and Justice series has presented a review of the latest international research, providing expertise to enhance the work of sociologists, psychologists, criminal lawyers, justice scholars, and political scientists. The series explores a full range of issues concerning crime, its causes, and its cure.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信