Policy Analysis III-Compare and Contrast
The Due Process Model and Crime Control Model represent two separate value systems, which compete for priority in the operation of the criminal process (Neubauer, 2001, p 12). “The “Due Process Model” proceeds from the premise that protecting the rights of the individual is primary, whereas the Crime Control Model” holds that repressing crime is the key value.” (Neubauer, 2001, 12) When comparing the two control models their views differ dramatically in reference to the causes of crime. Additionally, when comparing due process and crime control models one need to remember, “proponents of both models embrace constitutional values which are necessary to the kind of society in which American wish to live.” (Zalman, 2008) In the following compare and contrast paper, plea-bargaining and the three strikes law are chosen discuss the policies conflict, and crime control model versus the consensus and due process model. Additionally answers will be provided to questions regarding the effects on law enforcement, courts, differences between federal and state and local polices, and how to measure the effectiveness of said polices. Compare and Contrast of Policies
Plea bargains are one of the most controversial practices in the criminal justice system because of the fear the innocent defendants would plea and judges imposing unduly lenient sentences (Neubauer, 2008, p. 20). Further criticism focuses on the deterrent effect of punishment. According to the crime control model, court hearings have eroded the deterrent effect of punishment (Neubauer, 2009, p. 20). “Not only is the problem serious, but there is evidence that it is getting worse, suggesting that, whatever deterrent effect the criminal justice system does have, its effective-ness in deterring crime may be decreasing over time.” (Barnett-Hagel, 1977) However, some believe plea bargains allow the guilty to escape with a light sentence; therefore, weakens the adversary system because a person is innocent until proven and every defendant has a right to trial. Critics claim plea bargains are secret, sneaky arrangements that are opposing to the individual’s will.
Three Strikes Law
Many conflicts of the three strikes law have been unintended and uneven impacts. In summarizing a few, because of the wide scope of the provisions of California’s three-strikes law the result is long prison terms for many less serious crimes (Brown, 2005). Among the 36,000 second-strikers, less than one-fourth were admitted to prison for a violent offense (Brown, 2005). Secondly, prosecutorial discretion over charging and plea bargaining has resulted in very uneven application of the law between different jurisdictions within the state (Legislative Analyst Office, 1995). In addition, African-Americans comprise 31% of inmates in the state’s prisons, but 37% of offenders convicted under two strikes and 44% of three strikes offenders (Legislative Analyst Office, 1995). Comparing Plea Bargaining and Three Strikes Law
Although each jurisdiction plea bargaining process varies, “from a highly adversarial system and setting to one in which the participants cooperatively seek “substantive justice” and from a court where only charges may be bargained because of mandatory sentencing policies to one that focuses on sentences because they are authorized to be indeterminate for most, if not all, offenses (Hall, 2005).
Due Process Model
Although the Due Process model is said to resemble an obstacle course, the values are based upon repression of crime and not always assuming law enforcement’s fact-finding is correct, which is realistic because the model leaves room for error. (Gioson, 2005) (Neubauer, 2001, p 13) However, due process is said to assume automatically the individual is guilty of the alleged charge before the case is proven; therefore, within the model finality is very low and leaves room for appeal....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document