Loading…
Public choice theory and overcriminalization
"2 In the "bad old days," back when many states operated criminal justice systems that were "a pious charade,"3 so far removed from the textbook ideal as to be a parody of how the criminal process should work,4 academics took delight in identifying systemic flaws in state an...
Saved in:
Published in: | Harvard journal of law and public policy 2013-03, Vol.36 (2), p.715 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | |
container_end_page | |
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 715 |
container_title | Harvard journal of law and public policy |
container_volume | 36 |
creator | Larkin, Paul J., Jr |
description | "2 In the "bad old days," back when many states operated criminal justice systems that were "a pious charade,"3 so far removed from the textbook ideal as to be a parody of how the criminal process should work,4 academics took delight in identifying systemic flaws in state and local criminal processes and in skewering their law enforcement officials for pursuing an atavistic approach to justice.5 Later, as the Supreme Court roped in the outliers, commentators analyzed the doctrinal development of substantive criminal law6 and the course taken by the Supreme Court in its attempts to iron out the remaining procedural wrinkles in federal and state efforts to investigate crimes and dispose of cases.7 Today, the academy less often analyzes Supreme Court case law than it pursues systems analysis of the criminal justice process.8 The problems depicted are not minor blemishes. The system seems beset by core defects that should have been fixed long ago: prosecutors withholding or concealing obviously exculpatory evidence,9 the government's refusal to fund forensic examinations- DNA tests in particular- that could establish with near certainty whether a given individual committed a particular crime,10 the conviction of innocent defendants represented by appointed defense counsel too swamped with cases and too severely underfunded to properly investigate the charges against their clients,11 and the sight of prisoners stacked like cordwood in the nation's prisons.12 One of those flaws is "overcriminalization." Numerous commentators in the academy and elsewhere have discussed this phenomenon,16 as has the American Bar Association (ABA).17 Several former senior Justice Department officials have expressed their concern about it.18 The House Judiciary Committee has looked into it.19 Even the media has picked up on it.20 Is overcriminalization inevitable? |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1350374089</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A330143496</galeid><sourcerecordid>A330143496</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g359t-9845274b360c51a31ee5451e52d66c8076f603703f89f09617719f6f385b921a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptzl1LwzAUgOEgCs7pfyh4JaySNF_N5RjqBgO90OuSZiddRtdok4r66w1McIMSyIHwvIecoUlBJcsFl8U5mmCiaM5KWVyiqxB2GGPGSDlBs5ehbp3JzNY7A1ncgu-_M91tMv8Jvend3nW6dT86Ot9dowur2wA3f3OK3h4fXhfLfP38tFrM13lDuYq5KhkvJKupwIYTTQkAZ5wALzZCmBJLYQWmElNbKouVIFISZYWlJa9VkYIpuj3sfe_9xwAhVjs_9OkfoSKUp5ThUv2rRrdQuc762Guzd8FUc0oxYZQpkVQ-ohrooNet78C69Hzi70d8OhvYOzMa3J0EyUT4io0eQqhWy9WpnR3Zegiug5Cu4JptDIfkiP8CbpeFUQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1350374089</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Public choice theory and overcriminalization</title><source>Criminology Collection</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate</source><source>Nexis UK</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>Politics Collection</source><source>PAIS Index</source><creator>Larkin, Paul J., Jr</creator><creatorcontrib>Larkin, Paul J., Jr</creatorcontrib><description>"2 In the "bad old days," back when many states operated criminal justice systems that were "a pious charade,"3 so far removed from the textbook ideal as to be a parody of how the criminal process should work,4 academics took delight in identifying systemic flaws in state and local criminal processes and in skewering their law enforcement officials for pursuing an atavistic approach to justice.5 Later, as the Supreme Court roped in the outliers, commentators analyzed the doctrinal development of substantive criminal law6 and the course taken by the Supreme Court in its attempts to iron out the remaining procedural wrinkles in federal and state efforts to investigate crimes and dispose of cases.7 Today, the academy less often analyzes Supreme Court case law than it pursues systems analysis of the criminal justice process.8 The problems depicted are not minor blemishes. The system seems beset by core defects that should have been fixed long ago: prosecutors withholding or concealing obviously exculpatory evidence,9 the government's refusal to fund forensic examinations- DNA tests in particular- that could establish with near certainty whether a given individual committed a particular crime,10 the conviction of innocent defendants represented by appointed defense counsel too swamped with cases and too severely underfunded to properly investigate the charges against their clients,11 and the sight of prisoners stacked like cordwood in the nation's prisons.12 One of those flaws is "overcriminalization." Numerous commentators in the academy and elsewhere have discussed this phenomenon,16 as has the American Bar Association (ABA).17 Several former senior Justice Department officials have expressed their concern about it.18 The House Judiciary Committee has looked into it.19 Even the media has picked up on it.20 Is overcriminalization inevitable?</description><identifier>ISSN: 0193-4872</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2374-6572</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge: Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc</publisher><subject>Crime prevention ; Criminal law ; Criminal procedure ; Economic analysis ; Interest groups ; Judiciary ; Law enforcement ; Political aspects ; Politics ; Public choice theory ; Theory</subject><ispartof>Harvard journal of law and public policy, 2013-03, Vol.36 (2), p.715</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2013 Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy Spring 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/1350374089?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11688,21376,21387,21394,27866,33611,33769,33985,36060,43733,43814,43948,44363</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Larkin, Paul J., Jr</creatorcontrib><title>Public choice theory and overcriminalization</title><title>Harvard journal of law and public policy</title><description>"2 In the "bad old days," back when many states operated criminal justice systems that were "a pious charade,"3 so far removed from the textbook ideal as to be a parody of how the criminal process should work,4 academics took delight in identifying systemic flaws in state and local criminal processes and in skewering their law enforcement officials for pursuing an atavistic approach to justice.5 Later, as the Supreme Court roped in the outliers, commentators analyzed the doctrinal development of substantive criminal law6 and the course taken by the Supreme Court in its attempts to iron out the remaining procedural wrinkles in federal and state efforts to investigate crimes and dispose of cases.7 Today, the academy less often analyzes Supreme Court case law than it pursues systems analysis of the criminal justice process.8 The problems depicted are not minor blemishes. The system seems beset by core defects that should have been fixed long ago: prosecutors withholding or concealing obviously exculpatory evidence,9 the government's refusal to fund forensic examinations- DNA tests in particular- that could establish with near certainty whether a given individual committed a particular crime,10 the conviction of innocent defendants represented by appointed defense counsel too swamped with cases and too severely underfunded to properly investigate the charges against their clients,11 and the sight of prisoners stacked like cordwood in the nation's prisons.12 One of those flaws is "overcriminalization." Numerous commentators in the academy and elsewhere have discussed this phenomenon,16 as has the American Bar Association (ABA).17 Several former senior Justice Department officials have expressed their concern about it.18 The House Judiciary Committee has looked into it.19 Even the media has picked up on it.20 Is overcriminalization inevitable?</description><subject>Crime prevention</subject><subject>Criminal law</subject><subject>Criminal procedure</subject><subject>Economic analysis</subject><subject>Interest groups</subject><subject>Judiciary</subject><subject>Law enforcement</subject><subject>Political aspects</subject><subject>Politics</subject><subject>Public choice theory</subject><subject>Theory</subject><issn>0193-4872</issn><issn>2374-6572</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>BGRYB</sourceid><sourceid>DPSOV</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M0O</sourceid><sourceid>M2L</sourceid><recordid>eNptzl1LwzAUgOEgCs7pfyh4JaySNF_N5RjqBgO90OuSZiddRtdok4r66w1McIMSyIHwvIecoUlBJcsFl8U5mmCiaM5KWVyiqxB2GGPGSDlBs5ehbp3JzNY7A1ncgu-_M91tMv8Jvend3nW6dT86Ot9dowur2wA3f3OK3h4fXhfLfP38tFrM13lDuYq5KhkvJKupwIYTTQkAZ5wALzZCmBJLYQWmElNbKouVIFISZYWlJa9VkYIpuj3sfe_9xwAhVjs_9OkfoSKUp5ThUv2rRrdQuc762Guzd8FUc0oxYZQpkVQ-ohrooNet78C69Hzi70d8OhvYOzMa3J0EyUT4io0eQqhWy9WpnR3Zegiug5Cu4JptDIfkiP8CbpeFUQ</recordid><startdate>20130322</startdate><enddate>20130322</enddate><creator>Larkin, Paul J., Jr</creator><general>Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc</general><general>Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy</general><scope>N95</scope><scope>XI7</scope><scope>IHI</scope><scope>ILT</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>8AM</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGRYB</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>K7.</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0O</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130322</creationdate><title>Public choice theory and overcriminalization</title><author>Larkin, Paul J., Jr</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g359t-9845274b360c51a31ee5451e52d66c8076f603703f89f09617719f6f385b921a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Crime prevention</topic><topic>Criminal law</topic><topic>Criminal procedure</topic><topic>Economic analysis</topic><topic>Interest groups</topic><topic>Judiciary</topic><topic>Law enforcement</topic><topic>Political aspects</topic><topic>Politics</topic><topic>Public choice theory</topic><topic>Theory</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Larkin, Paul J., Jr</creatorcontrib><collection>Gale Business: Insights</collection><collection>Business Insights: Essentials</collection><collection>Gale In Context: U.S. History</collection><collection>Gale OneFile: LegalTrac</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection【Remote access available】</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Criminology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Criminal Justice (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Criminal Justice Database</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Harvard journal of law and public policy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Larkin, Paul J., Jr</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Public choice theory and overcriminalization</atitle><jtitle>Harvard journal of law and public policy</jtitle><date>2013-03-22</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>715</spage><pages>715-</pages><issn>0193-4872</issn><eissn>2374-6572</eissn><abstract>"2 In the "bad old days," back when many states operated criminal justice systems that were "a pious charade,"3 so far removed from the textbook ideal as to be a parody of how the criminal process should work,4 academics took delight in identifying systemic flaws in state and local criminal processes and in skewering their law enforcement officials for pursuing an atavistic approach to justice.5 Later, as the Supreme Court roped in the outliers, commentators analyzed the doctrinal development of substantive criminal law6 and the course taken by the Supreme Court in its attempts to iron out the remaining procedural wrinkles in federal and state efforts to investigate crimes and dispose of cases.7 Today, the academy less often analyzes Supreme Court case law than it pursues systems analysis of the criminal justice process.8 The problems depicted are not minor blemishes. The system seems beset by core defects that should have been fixed long ago: prosecutors withholding or concealing obviously exculpatory evidence,9 the government's refusal to fund forensic examinations- DNA tests in particular- that could establish with near certainty whether a given individual committed a particular crime,10 the conviction of innocent defendants represented by appointed defense counsel too swamped with cases and too severely underfunded to properly investigate the charges against their clients,11 and the sight of prisoners stacked like cordwood in the nation's prisons.12 One of those flaws is "overcriminalization." Numerous commentators in the academy and elsewhere have discussed this phenomenon,16 as has the American Bar Association (ABA).17 Several former senior Justice Department officials have expressed their concern about it.18 The House Judiciary Committee has looked into it.19 Even the media has picked up on it.20 Is overcriminalization inevitable?</abstract><cop>Cambridge</cop><pub>Harvard Society for Law and Public Policy, Inc</pub><tpages>41</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0193-4872 |
ispartof | Harvard journal of law and public policy, 2013-03, Vol.36 (2), p.715 |
issn | 0193-4872 2374-6572 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1350374089 |
source | Criminology Collection; EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate; Nexis UK; Social Science Premium Collection; ABI/INFORM Global; Politics Collection; PAIS Index |
subjects | Crime prevention Criminal law Criminal procedure Economic analysis Interest groups Judiciary Law enforcement Political aspects Politics Public choice theory Theory |
title | Public choice theory and overcriminalization |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T12%3A22%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Public%20choice%20theory%20and%20overcriminalization&rft.jtitle=Harvard%20journal%20of%20law%20and%20public%20policy&rft.au=Larkin,%20Paul%20J.,%20Jr&rft.date=2013-03-22&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=715&rft.pages=715-&rft.issn=0193-4872&rft.eissn=2374-6572&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA330143496%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g359t-9845274b360c51a31ee5451e52d66c8076f603703f89f09617719f6f385b921a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1350374089&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A330143496&rfr_iscdi=true |