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: 43059 Find in a Library
Title: IN BEHALF OF PREARREST DIVERSION
Journal: UNIVERSITY OF DETROIT JOURNAL OF URBAN LAW  Volume:54  Issue:2  Dated:(WINTER 1977), 553-577
Author(s): D P MALONE
Corporate Author: University of Detroit
School of Law
United States of America
Date Published: 1977
Page Count: 25
Sponsoring Agency: University of Detroit
Detroit, MI 48226
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: THE BENEFITS OF AN INFORMAL ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING PROCEDURE TO DIVERT MINOR CRIMINAL CASES FROM THE COURT SYSTEM, ADMINISTRATION OF SUCH A SYSTEM, AND CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ARE DISCUSSED.
Abstract: PREARREST DIVERSION IS PARTICULARLY SUITED TO FAMILY DISPUTES, LANDLORD-TENANT PROBLEMS, AND NEIGHBORHOOD INCIDENTS. SINCE SUCH INFORMAL HEARINGS CAN BE HELD AT NIGHT, PARTICIPANTS NEED NOT LOSE WAGES. THE CHIEF PROSECUTOR OF A JURISDICTION OR HIS DELEGATED REPRESENTATIVE IS THE BEST PERSON TO DETERMINE WHICH CASES ARE SUITABLE FOR PRETRIAL DIVERSION; THIS COOPERATION IS ESSENTIAL TO PROGRAM SUCCESS. AFTER THE HEARING IS SCHEDULED, BOTH PARTIES ARE FREE TO BRING WITNESSES. ATTORNEYS ARE UNNECESSARY BECAUSE THE HEARING IS NOT AN ADVERSARY PROCEDURE. THE OBJECT IS NOT TO DETERMINE GUILT OR INNOCENCE BUT TO WORK OUT A COMPROMISE. TO PROTECT RIGHTS UNDER THE FIFTH AMENDMENT ALL STATEMENTS MADE DURING THE HEARING ARE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL AND ARE NOT AVAILABLE IN CASE THE DISPUTE LATER GOES TO COURT. IN COLUMBUS, OHIO, THE CITIZENS' DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROGRAM HAS HANDLED 37,000 HEARINGS SINCE 1971 AND SAVED TAXPAYERS $2,650,000 IN COURT EXPENSE. THIS SYSTEM IS EXAMINED IN DETAIL. A SMALLER PROGRAM IN WESTLAND, MICH., WHICH HANDLES SIX TO TEN CASES A WEEK IS ALSO DESCRIBED. FOLLOW-UP SHOWS THAT IN BOTH PROGRAMS 95 PERCENT OF CASES ARE SUCCESSFULLY RESOLVED. IN COLUMBUS ONLY 1.7 PERCENT HAD FURTHER CONTACT WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
Index Term(s): Conflict resolution; Counseling; Diversion programs; Family crisis; Family offenses; Judicial diversion; Michigan; Misdemeanor; Ohio
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=43059

*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.