1.5 Criminal Justice System Process
As a result of the variations in the criminal justice system procedures in the states and the federal government, there exists no singular method for proceeding through the criminal justice system. But regardless of the nuances in the country’s criminal justice systems, all criminal justice procedures adhere to the guidelines set forth in the U.S. Constitution regarding the fair and unbiased treatment of the accused throughout the criminal justice process (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2021). Figure 1.8 below illustrates how individuals are processed into and move through the criminal justice system. Although this flowchart does not represent all criminal justice systems, it is a visual depiction intended to enhance the understanding of the general criminal justice process.
Crime Detection
The formal criminal justice process begins with the discovery of a law violation. Detecting law violators is a dynamic task that requires a blend of traditional investigative techniques, technological advancements, and community engagement (Braga et al., 2014). While law enforcement officials bear the formal responsibility for identifying law violations and criminal activity, the public also plays a significant role in crime detection and other phases of the criminal justice process. Instances of individuals engaging in suspicious or illegal activity may be observed either directly by a police officer or by a member of the public who then reports the incident to the police. The collaboration between the public and law enforcement, facilitated through criminal reporting mechanisms, proves crucial in furnishing timely and accurate information essential for identifying and apprehending perpetrators (Reisig & Parks, 2000). This collaboration underscores the importance of a cooperative relationship between law enforcement and the community in maintaining public safety.
Crimes manifest across a spectrum of severity, necessitating varied responses within the criminal justice framework (FBI, 2019). When police receive a report of suspicious or illegal activity, they will typically send one or two police officers to the reported location to gather information and deescalate disputes; for more serious offenses, they will collect evidence to establish probable cause. This evidence may lead to the arrest of a suspect or the issuance of a warrant by a judge that allows access to property for crucial evidence gathering to facilitate an arrest. When a criminal act is directly witnessed by an officer, the officer confronts the individuals involved, informs them about the illegality of their actions, and decides whether to arrest any suspects. This process highlights the importance of police responsiveness and discretion in addressing a wide range of criminal activities.
The duration of the initial investigation process that unfolds prior to making any arrest varies widely. The mere observation of a crime by an officer is often sufficient evidence to establish probable cause for an arrest. However, in other situations, investigations extend over years or even decades before resulting in an arrest. For instance, nearly two decades of investigations took place before the apprehension and sentencing of the Green River Killer, Gary Ridgway, a notorious serial killer in Washington State during the early 1980s to the late 1990s (Keppel & Birnes, 1995) (see Figure 1.9). In contrast, certain cases, such as the mysterious D.B. Cooper case, remain unsolved and after an extended period become cold cases with no resolution. This disparity of investigation timeframes highlights the complexity of investigations and the persistence required to properly address each unique criminal case.
Arrest
Once probable cause has been established, officers have the authority to arrest a suspect and take them into custody, thus restricting their individual freedoms, including the right to leave. Once under arrest, the suspect is officially under the control of the officer, yet they maintain some constitutional protections. The officer must recite their miranda rights (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966) after an arrest has been made and prior to further questioning.
Booking
Once the suspect is arrested, they are taken to the police station, jail, or detention center for booking. This standard protocol in the criminal justice system is designed to establish a formal record of the arrest, including the suspect’s personal information, identity, fingerprints, and mug shot. A thorough search of the suspect is also conducted, and their personal items are removed. In general, booking is a crucial juncture in determining whether the suspect will be further processed by the criminal justice system. In some situations, bail for the suspect may be set during the booking process. Bail is based on an initial determination of the amount of money the suspect must pay to be released pending further legal proceedings. This comprehensive procedure ensures timely documentation of the arrest record and initiates the formal legal proceedings against the accused.
Custody
While the suspect is detained, law enforcement may continue their investigation to gather additional evidence. Officers may conduct interrogations in an attempt to elicit a confession to the crime from the suspect as well as to gain insights into the motives behind the alleged crime. In some cases, officers may also organize in-person or photo lineups to identify potential witnesses or further connect the suspect to the crime. The imperative to find additional evidence is heightened as law enforcement typically has a 48-hour window to detain the suspect and demonstrate sufficient probable cause to advance the case to the prosecutor (Mulroy, 2012). If for any reason the prosecutor believes probable cause was not established within this timeframe, law enforcement must release the suspect. This critical period underscores the efficient and thorough investigative procedures to ensure the lawful and just processing of individuals in custody.
Charging
Once the arresting officers believe they have gathered sufficient evidence, they allocate the case to the prosecutor’s office. The prosecutor undertakes a comprehensive review of the case to determine the appropriate charges to bring against the suspect. The prosecutor takes various factors into consideration, including the severity of the crime, the quality of the evidence, potential political or social pressures, and the likelihood that the court will find the suspect guilty. Subsequently, the prosecutor has three primary options: (a) return the case to law enforcement for further investigation, (b) decline the case, a decision known as nolle prosequi, or (c) file the case in court and begin the process of officially charging the suspect of a crime. This pivotal stage in the legal process highlights the discretion and responsibility vested in prosecutors as they make crucial decisions that will significantly impact the trajectory of a criminal case.
Preliminary Hearing
Under the U.S. Constitution, the government, as represented by the prosecutor, must demonstrate probable cause that the accused has committed the alleged crimes as indicated in the charges. In all but two states, a grand jury is employed to varying extents to assess whether the prosecution has presented sufficient evidence to proceed with the case. If the prosecutor successfully provides ample evidence, the grand jury issues a true bill of indictment, specifying the exact charges and officially charging the suspect, who then becomes the accused. In jurisdictions that do not utilize a grand jury, the prosecutor directly files charging documents with a judge. Subsequently, a preliminary hearing is scheduled, during which the prosecutor presents the merits of the evidence before a judge. Simultaneously, the defendant and defense attorney have the opportunity to challenge the prosecutor’s charges. In this process, the judge, rather than a grand jury, determines whether the evidence is substantial enough to warrant proceeding to trial. This legal procedure ensures a careful evaluation of the evidence before the case advances in the criminal justice system.
Arraignment
An arraignment is often scheduled after the judge or grand jury rules in favor of the prosecutor in the preliminary hearing. During the arraignment, the defendant is formally notified of the charges brought against them and is required to submit an official plea of not guilty, guilty, or no contest. A not guilty plea affords defendants the opportunity to formally contest the charges in court or begin the process of negotiations for a plea deal. A guilty plea, however, is an admission of guilt to the charges and allegations and leads to sentencing, which may occur immediately or at a later time. On the other hand, a no contest plea allows a defendant to accept the conviction and charges without admitting guilt and is followed by sentencing, which may occur immediately or at a future date. Although both a guilty plea and a no contest plea agree to the conviction and acceptance of punishment for a committed crime, a no contest plea does not admit guilt and cannot be used as evidence in civil court, whereas a guilty plea can be used as evidence in civil courts. This critical stage in the legal process provides the defendant with important choices that shape the direction of the case as it is processed through the criminal justice system.
Bail Hearing
If bail was not set during booking, a separate bail hearing will be held to determine whether the defendant can be released from jail before trial. While all defendants have the right to a bail hearing, not all defendants will be released on bail. For less serious charges and when the defendant is neither a flight risk nor poses a risk to others, they might be released on recognizance. However, for more serious charges, the judge will consider multiple variables, including the accused’s past criminal record, flight risk, and social network, to decide whether to grant bail and determine the appropriate bail amount. If the defendant possesses the financial resources to post bail, they will be released pending the final case verdict. When released on bail or on recognizance, judges often impose conditions that the defendant must follow. In cases where the defendant is denied bail or cannot afford it, they are housed in jail to await their trial.
Plea Bargaining
Plea bargaining is a process in which the defense and prosecution engage in discussions regarding a potential guilty plea in exchange for various forms of leniency, such as a reduction in the number of charges, a decrease in the severity of the charge, or a more lenient sentence (Bibas, 2004). Plea bargaining can take place at any point in the legal proceedings after arraignment and before the conclusion of the trial.
Ethical Dilemma in Criminal Justice: Plea Bargaining
Plea bargaining is a crucial component of the criminal justice system that benefits the defendant, courts, and taxpayers. Despite its positive intentions, however, this practice introduces a range of ethical dilemmas that warrant careful consideration. One primary concern is the potential coercion of a defendant who, despite their innocence, may accept a plea deal due to a strong interest in avoiding uncertainties and potential harsh trial verdicts. This raises significant ethical questions pertaining to the protection of individual rights during the legal process as well as overall fairness. In addition, plea bargaining has received criticism for its contribution to systemic inequalities, particularly among defendants with limited economic resources and a lack of information about their rights. The expediency of plea bargaining also carries the risk of compromising the pursuit of justice by discouraging thorough investigations and hindering the presentation of all relevant evidence. Striking a balance between the efficiency benefits of plea bargaining and the imperative to uphold ethical standards remains a complex challenge in the criminal justice system.
Adjudication
If the prosecution and defendant fail to reach an agreement on a plea of guilt, the case proceeds to a criminal trial where either a jury or judge (known as a bench trial) will determine whether the prosecutor can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the charges. The trial follows a structured process that allows both the prosecution and defense to present their cases. The jury trial can result in a guilty verdict, a not guilty verdict, or a hung jury. After a guilty verdict, the defendant is scheduled for sentencing, whereas after a not guilty verdict, the defendant is released from custody and is free to go. When the jury is unable to agree on a verdict, they are considered deadlocked or a hung jury. In such instances, the case remains unsolved, and the prosecutor must decide whether to drop the case or request a retrial at a later date.
Sentencing and Punishment
Once the defendant is found guilty in court or enters a guilty plea, they proceed to the sentencing phase for punishment. Punishments vary widely and can range from a small fine to life in prison, or even the death penalty (Bibas, 2004). The judge will often rely on presentencing reports that community correction officers develop, the defendant’s previous criminal record, the seriousness of the crime, and other relevant variables to determine the exact nature and length of the sentence of the state-authorized punishment.
Corrections
Once the offender is sentenced, they are placed under the authority of the local, state, or federal corrections department. An offender may be placed on probation, in a community corrections facility, rehabilitation center, jail, or prison (Bibas, 2004). Offenders placed in jail or prison may have the opportunity to participate in rehabilitation, workforce, and education programs, depending on the available offerings at the corrections facility. Following the successful completion of a jail or prison sentence, ex-offenders are released into society, typically under some form of parole or community corrections supervision.
Community Corrections
While prison and jail are commonly associated with corrections, it is essential to recognize that a significant number of individuals under the jurisdiction of corrections departments are within the community corrections system. Community corrections serve either as an alternative punishment to incarceration (e.g., community service, probation, house arrest) or as a postrelease supervision process designed to assist ex-offenders reintegrate into society while providing oversight to protect the community (Bibas, 2004). Individuals in the community corrections system are not entirely free as they may be subject to drug tests, random house searches, or the loss of various privileges, such as voting rights, driver’s licenses, and gun ownership.
Attributions
- Figure 1.8: Criminal Justice System Flowchart by Bureau of Justice Statistics in the public domain; Terms of use: “Unless otherwise indicated, information on Department of Justice websites is in the public domain and may be copied and distributed without permission.”
- Figure 1.9: Gary Ridgway Mugshot 11302001 by King County Sheriff’s Office in the public domain; King County Sheriff’s Office grants anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.
- Figure 1.10: image released under the Pexels License
- Figure 1.11: Prison Inmate handcuffed by Jobs for Felons Hub is released under CC BY 2.0
- Figure 1.12: image released under the Pexels License
- Figure 1.13: Prison Jail Cell by Jobs For Felons Hub is released under CC BY 2.0
The language found in the Fourth Amendment stating that people have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, and that no searches or seizures can occur without a warrant issued upon probable cause. For arrest situations, the term is generally interpreted to mean that a reasonable person would believe: 1) a crime has been committed and 2) the person to be arrested is most likely the one who committed the crime.
The authority or freedom given to individuals within the criminal justice system to make decisions based on their judgment, expertise, and interpretation of laws and policies, often allowing for flexibility in handling cases and outcomes.
A criminal investigation that remains unsolved and inactive for an extended period, often due to lack of evidence or leads.
The legal process by which a person who is under the suspicion of committing a crime is taken into custody by law enforcement authorities.
Please look for related terms in the Glossary
A Latin legal term used in criminal law to denote a prosecutor's decision to drop or abandon charges against a defendant, effectively indicating that the prosecution will not proceed with the case.
A group of citizens convened by a court to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to indict (formally charge) an individual with a crime.
A formal written document issued by a grand jury accusing a specific individual of a criminal offense, indicating that there is sufficient evidence to believe that a crime has been committed, and the accused should stand criminal trial.
A legal plea entered by a defendant in a criminal case, indicating that they deny the charges brought against them and do not accept responsibility for the alleged offense, thereby contesting their culpability in the eyes of the court. It is also a verdict of a legal court proceeding indicating that the defendant has been found by a court of law to be not responsible for an alleged offense, indicating they are free of all criminal charges.
A legal verdict indicating that a defendant has admitted to or been found responsible for committing a crime or offense, beyond a reasonable doubt, according to the laws of the jurisdiction.
Legally known as nolo contendere, is a plea in which the defendant neither admits guilt nor denies the charges against them but accepts punishment as if they were guilty, often used as an alternative to pleading guilty in criminal cases.
A legal term referring to a defendant's pledge to appear in court as required, often without the need for monetary bail, based on their personal assurance and reputation within the community.
A legal proceeding in which a judge, rather than a jury, hears, evaluates evidence, decides questions of law, and render a verdict in a criminal or civil case. The judge is responsible for determining guilt or innocence, as well as imposing any resulting sentence, if applicable. This type of trial is typically used when either party waives their right to a jury trial or in certain circumstances where a jury trial is not available or deemed unnecessary.