Courtroom Workgroup

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the United States criminal justice system, a Courtroom Workgroup is an informal arrangement between a criminal prosecutor, criminal defense attorney, and the judicial officer. This foundational concept in the academic discipline of criminal justice, recharacterizes the seemingly adversarial courtroom participants as collaborators in "doing justice." The courtroom workgroup was proposed by Eisenstein and Jacob in 1977 to explain their observations of the ways courts, especially lower level courts, actually come to decisions

Because the courtroom workgroup deviates from the public consensus of how justice works, it has developed a deviant set of virtues to continue its work and facilitate daily life for its participants. The academic theory of the courtroom workgroup has four cornerstone concepts that recognize this fact: Speed, Pragmatic Cynicism, Collegiality, and Secrecy. Efficient courtroom workgroups seek to process cases rather than dispense justice. This has been confirmed to greater and lesser extents in different courts. Defendants are assumed to be guilty. The legal merits of the case are the true determinative factors of an outcome. Group relationships and the desire to "maintain" a healthy working relationship are important to group members. The workings of the courtroom group and the "going rate" for given crimes are not matters for public disclosure. Estimates can be given to clients, but usually couched in terms of the prosecution's willingness to negotiate. (Summarized by O'Connor, T.R., 2005)

The concept of a courtroom workgroup is associated with plea bargaining. The courtroom workgroup shows remarkable explanatory power in overburdened courts dealing with large caseloads. While many of the higher level prosecutions still follow the adversarial model, there is evidence that lower-level proceedings follow the courtroom workgroup model. Boland, Brady, Tyson, & Bassler (1983) indicate that approximately 90 percent of criminal cases are settled by plea bargain. This figure appears to be stable over the last twenty years (Rainville & Reaves, 2003). Some collaborative efforts on the part of the courtroom workgroup simply must be present to facilitate this high percentage of pleas.

[edit] Sources

• Eisenstein, J. & Jacob, H. (1977). Felony Justice: An organizational analysis of criminal courts. Boston : Little & Brown
• Boland, B., Brady, E., Tyson, H., & Bassler, J. (1983). The prosecution of felony arrests. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
• Rainville, G. & Reaves, B.A. (2003). Felony defendants in large urban counties. Washington D.C.: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
• O'Connor, T.R. (2005). Court organizational issues: The courtroom workgroup. http://faculty.ncwc.edu/TOConnor/417/417lect12.htm

p