THE FIRST CHAPTER PRESENTS AN ANALYTICAL MODEL FOR STUDYING FACTORS INFLUENCING THE INTRODUCTION OR SUPPRESSION OF DISCRETIONARY DECISIONMAKING IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM. DISCRETION IS NOT NECESSARILY LIMITED BY CRIME LEGISLATION, AND A SOCIOLOGIST MAINTAINS THAT COLLEAGUES SHOULD CONCERN THEMSELVES WITH STUDYING THE FORMS DISCRETION MIGHT TAKE IN CONJUNCTION WITH SPECIFIC LEGISLATION. AN EVALUATIVE STUDY OF THE NEW YORK STATE 1973 DRUG LAW ILLUSTRATES THE FAILURE OF LEGISLATION TO SERVE INDIVIDUAL REGIONAL NEEDS. A SECTION COVERING THE IMPACT OF COURTS ON DISCRETION CONTAINS AN EXAMINATION OF THE PLEA-BARGAINING AND JAILING OPERATIONS IN RURAL AREAS AND AN EVALUATION OF THE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF FEDERAL COURTS IN RELATION TO STATE PRISON REFORM. VARIOUS THEORIES OF REHABILITATION ARE DISCUSSED IN RELATION TO DISCRETION IN CORRECTIONS, AND THE IMPACT OF DIVERSION ON ADULT WOMEN, WHO ARE OVERREPRESENTED IN DIVERSION PROGRAMS, IS STUDIED. AN ARTICLE ON SENTENCING HEARING REFORM STRESSES THE NEED TO MAKE THIS STAGE OF THE CORRECTIONS PROCESS MORE RESPONSIVE BY DELINEATING POLICY OBJECTIVES OF THE HEARING AND FORMULATING SUBSTANTIVE AND PROCEDURAL STANDARDS BY WHICH THE OBJECTIVES CAN BE ACHIEVED. THE FINAL PAPER DISCUSSED THE JUDICIAL REFORM IN THE PHILADELPHIA (PA.) COURT OF COMMON PLEAS WITH REGARD TO SENTENCING GUIDELINES. TABULAR DATA ILLUSTRATE THE ARTICLES, AND BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (DAG)