Throughout U.S. history, the ideals of equality and equal justice have ranked high. Most of
the history of criminal procedure, especially state criminal procedure since the Civil War,
developed in response to racial discrimination. Although racial discrimination has diminished, it
has not disappeared. Additionally, the ideal of equal justice reaches beyond ending race
discrimination; it includes class, gender, ethnic, religious, and sexual orientation discrimination.
In criminal procedure, both formal decision making according to written rules and informal
discretionary decision making according to judgments based on official training and experience
play a crucial rule. Each step in the criminal process from investigating crimes to appealing
convictions involves decisions. Each step requires a criminal justice professional to decide
Researchers on both conservative and liberal sides are calling for new criminal procedure
that includes both judicial decision making and academic research in the process. This new
approach is called the balancing approach and seeks to examine two empirical questions: how
effective are these practices in controlling crime and what are their impacts on individual liberty
and privacy? While this new approach won’t guarantee the best results in criminal procedure, it
will give us a better picture. Empirical evidence will be provided in those areas where it is
available throughout the text.
We also examine how accurate the criminal justice system is in sorting out the guilty from
the innocent. When errors are made, there are many reasons including prosecutorial discretion;
inconsistent policing; infrequent jury trials; too much plea bargaining; not enough access to legal
representation; inadequate training and lack of law enforcement officers; improper forensic
procedures; and frequent reliance on unreliable evidence.
Throughout the book, you will notice that court opinions refer to past cases to support their
reasoning and their decisions. This reliance on prior cases (precedent) is part of how lawyers
think. Related to reliance on precedent is the doctrine of stare decisis, which requires courts to
follow prior precedent in their decisions.