CASELAW CONCERNING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION IN SCREENING AND CHARGING IS REVIEWED. SCREENING OBJECTIVES, PROBLEMS, PROCEDURES, AND MECHANISMS ARE DISCUSSED, WITH EXTENSIVE REFERENCES TO STANDARDS DEVELOPED BY THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION, THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMISSION ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND GOALS, AND THE NATIONAL DISTRICT ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION. REASONS FOR PERMITTING PROSECUTORS TO SCREEN CASES--LIMITED ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES, VAGUE STATUTES, LOW ENFORCEMENT PRIORITY ACCORDED SOME VIOLATIONS--ARE DISCUSSED. A SIMILAR ANALYSIS IS PRESENTED OF THE CHARGING PROCESS--THE DECISION WHETHER TO CHARGE AND THE SELECTION OF THE MOST APPROPRIATE CHARGE. PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION IN CHARGING, CHARGING MECHANISMS, ESTABLISHMENT OF CHARGING GUIDELINES, AND MAINTENANCE OF CHARGING RECORDS ARE DISCUSSED. EXCERPTS ARE PRESENTED FROM MATERIALS ON THE IMPORTANCE OF EARLY SCREENING BY EXPERIENCED PROSECUTORS, ON INFORMAL SCREENING BY POLICE, AND ON THE RELATIVE ADVANTAGES OF VARIOUS DECISIONMAKING POINTS AND LOCATIONS AT WHICH SCREENING CAN TAKE PLACE (UPON ARREST, AT THE POLICE STATION, IN THE PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE, IN THE COURTROOM). IT IS POINTED OUT THAT, BECAUSE SCREENING AND CHARGING ARE SO INTERTWINED, MUCH OF THE MATERIAL PRESENTED ON ONE SUBJECT APPLIES TO THE OTHER AS WELL. A BIBLIOGRAPHY IS PROVIDED. (LKM)