skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 168650 Find in a Library
Title: Judicial Federalism and Prosecutorial Vindictiveness: State Responses to Bordenkircher and Goodwin
Journal: Journal of Crime and Justice  Volume:20  Issue:1  Dated:(1997)  Pages:73-90
Author(s): D M Jones
Date Published: 1997
Page Count: 18
Type: Issue Overview
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper examines the application of "judicial federalism" to State criminal law.
Abstract: In particular, the article examines how State courts have reacted to the United States Supreme Court's interpretation of "prosecutorial vindictiveness" in State cases. Results show that State courts have not used "independent state grounds" as a means of protecting individual rights in this aspect of criminal procedure. State supreme courts are neglected elements in the American political system. While their activities have often been overlooked by both scholars and the public, their work is important; they decide over 10,000 cases each year. In the vast majority of these cases, their rulings are determinative; most litigants do not seek to appeal the decisions and, should they wish to do so, often the United States Supreme Court either lacks jurisdiction or declines to hear the appeals. Because of their importance, State supreme courts have been referred to as "policy-makers in the Federal system." One of the mechanisms through which state supreme courts can have an effect on policy-making is through the use of "judicial federalism" or the "new federalism." Under this doctrine, state courts can be expected to expand citizen rights by invoking "adequate and independent state grounds" present in State constitutions. Notes, references, cases cited
Main Term(s): Courts
Index Term(s): Appeal procedures; Court procedures; Criminal law; Judicial review; Jurisprudence; Legal doctrines; Prosecutorial discretion; State supreme courts; US Supreme Court decisions
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=168650

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.