THREE TYPES OF PROSECUTORIAL ACTIVITIES ARE CONSIDERED: NEGOTIATIONS, INCLUDING PLEA BARGAINING AND NOLLE PROSSE (DROPPING ONE OR MORE CHARGES); ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS STEMMING FROM INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONAL DEMANDS (E.G., CLASSIFICATION OF CASES AS MAJOR OR NOT MAJOR ON THE BASIS OF SUCH CONSIDERATIONS AS EVIDENTIARY PROBLEMS); AND SENTENCE RECOMMENDATIONS. THE STUDY SAMPLE INCLUDES PERSONS INDICTED ON CHARGES OF BURGLARY, AGGRAVATED ROBBERY, OR ASSAULT WITH INTENT TO KILL. MOST (98 PERCENT) OF THE DEFENDANTS WERE TRIED BY A JUDGE SITTING WITHOUT A JURY. A NUMBER OF ANALYSES ARE PERFORMED TO EXPLORE CORRELATIONS AMONG THE PROSECUTORIAL DECISION VARIABLES AND SENTENCE SEVERITY. THE SCALE OF SENTENCE SEVERITY USED IN THE ANALYSIS IS BASED ON THE PERCEPTIONS OF JUDGES. THE ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT SPECIFIC PROSECUTORIAL DECISIONS IN PLEA BARGAINING AND CHARGING, UNDER CERTAN CIRCUMSTANCES, CAN BE VERY DETRIMENTAL TO THE DEFENDANT IN TERMS OF SENTENCE SEVERITY. THE ANALYSIS ALSO SUGGESTS THAT DEFENDANTS HAVE NO ASSURANCE OF BEING TREATED FAIRLY AND EQUITABLY. IT APPEARS THAT THE PRACTICE OF CASE CLASSIFICATIONS CAN BE USED TO INSURE A GOOD CONVICTION RATE, AND THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE LABELING OF A CASE AS MAJOR RESULTS IN MORE SEVERE PUNISHMENT. A SIGNIFICANT CORRELATION IS FOUND BETWEEN THE SEVERITY OF THE SENTENCE RECOMMENDED BY THE PROSECUTOR AND THE SEVERITY OF THE SENTENCE IMPOSED. DETAILS OF THE ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ARE PRESENTED. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE ARE DISCUSSED, WITH REFERENCE TO A FORM OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE IN WHICH THE PROSECUTOR IS CHIEF DECISIONMAKER AND MANAGER. SUPPORTING DATA AND A BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE INCLUDED. (LKM)