EACH SECTOR OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS SUBJECT TO A LIST OF RULES RESULTING FROM COURT DECISIONS, ADMINISTRATIVE PRONOUNCEMENTS, AND STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS. UTILITY THEORY, THE THEORY OF BENEFITS VERSUS COSTS, IS USED TO EXAMINE POSSIBLE USES OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE POLICIES TO INCREASE COMPLIANCE WITH THESE RULES. THE CASE OF MAPP VS OHIO IS AN EXAMPLE OF NEGATIVE POLICY INCREASING COMPLIANCE; THIS CASE INVOLVED USE OF SEARCH WARRANTS BY POLICE. AFTER THE DECISION, USE OF SEARCH WARRANTS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY. STUDIES IN BOSTON AND CINCINNATI SHOWED THAT A BENEFIT, PRAISE FOR A WELL-CONDUCTED SEARCH, COMBINED WITH A COST, A PENALTY IF A SEARCH WARRANT WERE NOT OBTAINED, SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED COMPLIANCE. LOWER COURT JUDGES ARE SUBJECT TO A LONG LIST OF RULES BUT CURRENT DISCIPLINARY PRACTICES MAKE IT DIFFICULT TO APPLY NEGATIVE SANCTIONS. INSTEAD, A SYSTEM OF PUBLIC PRAISE, AWARDS FROM PEERS, AND RECOGNITION FROM PUBLIC OFFICIALS SEEMS TO BE MORE EFFECTIVE IN INCREASING COMPLIANCE. PRESENT DATA ON RULE VIOLATIONS BY CORRECTIONS OFFICIALS ARE SCANT. HOWEVER, IN MOST SYSTEMS THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE SANCTIONS (FIRING, DEMOTION, DISCIPLINARY ACTION) ARE NOT OFTEN INVOKED. POSITIVE SANCTIONS SUCH AS MONEY, PUBLIC PRAISE, AND A GREATER HAND IN SETTING POLICY SHOULD BE USED TO ENCOURAGE PRISON OFFICIALS TO FOLLOW DUE PROCESS RULES AND RESPECT PRISONER RIGHTS. NEGATIVE SANCTIONS HAVE, IN THE PAST, BEEN RESERVED FOR EXTREME VIOLATIONS. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED.