Criminal Justice and Crime Control

February 17, 1965

Report Outline
Revision of Rules of Criminal Procedure
Public Safety vs. Rights of the Accused
Proposals to Strengthen Crime Control

Revision of Rules of Criminal Procedure

At The Heart of current efforts to modernize procedures of criminal justice is the fear that constitutional protections for the individual, as now interpreted by the courts, are actually having the effect of increasing criminal activity. The principal purpose of the efforts at procedural reform is to introduce clarity and order into a motley of new laws and court decisions which have left uncertainty as to what action is permissible, or is not permissible, in seeking to bring criminal offenders to justice. On one side are those who assert that police officers and public prosecutors are so crippled by court decisions that they cannot wage effective war on crime. On the other side are those who believe that the state's crime-fighting powers are still too formidable to permit modification of legal safeguards against their abuse.

Efforts by Different Groups to Clarify Rules

The American Bar Association recently embarked on a large-scale project to formulate minimum standards for the administration of criminal justice, with a view to “improving the fairness, efficiency and effectiveness of criminal justice in state and federal courts.” Chief Judge J. Edward Lumbard of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, heads the 12-member special committee that is directing the A.B.A. project. Eighty outstanding judges, lawyers and law school professors have been named to serve on advisory committees dealing with six aspects of the general question: (1) Police functions, (2) prosecution and defense, (3) criminal trials, (4) sentencing and review, (5) fairness of trials and (6) press freedom. The undertaking is expected to take three years to complete. After that, the A.B.A. plans to work for adoption of the recommended standards in state and federal jurisdictions.

The Bar Association's project calls to mind that on May 25, 1962, the American Law Institute approved a model penal code which had been in preparation for a decade and which “even before the code was approved had begun to influence the criminal law of the states and the federal government.” Preparation of that code, like the present A.B.A. project, was a comprehensive undertaking by leading authorities, aimed to bring order out of scattered and sometimes inconsistent enactments, decisions, and precedents. The American Law Institute is currently midway on a five-year study of anti-crime procedures prior to arraignment, a field which is the subject of a great deal of controversy.

ISSUE TRACKER for Related Reports
May 27, 2022  Crime in America
Feb. 10, 2017  Forensic Science Controversies
Feb. 05, 2016  Restorative Justice
Jan. 30, 2015  Central American Gangs
Aug. 29, 2014  Transnational Crime
Aug. 09, 2013  Sexual Assault in the Military
Oct. 26, 2012  Mexico's Future
Apr. 20, 2012  Criminal Records and Employment
Apr. 19, 2011  Honor Killings
Sep. 2010  Crime in Latin America
Jul. 16, 2010  Gangs in the U.S.
Jul. 17, 2009  Examining Forensics
Apr. 17, 2009  Wrongful Convictions Updated
Feb. 08, 2008  Fighting Crime
Oct. 11, 2002  Corporate Crime
Apr. 04, 1997  Declining Crime Rates
Dec. 10, 1982  Arson: America's Most Costly Crime
May 07, 1982  Helping Victims of Crime
Mar. 13, 1981  Violent Crime's Return to Prominence
Jul. 15, 1977  Crime Reduction: Reality or Illusion
Jan. 19, 1972  Crime of Rape
Jan. 22, 1969  Street Crime in America
Jan. 17, 1968  Burglary Prevention
Sep. 22, 1965  Compensation for Victims of Crime
Feb. 17, 1965  Criminal Justice and Crime Control
Oct. 18, 1961  Control of City Crime
Jun. 20, 1929  Crime and the Courts
Crime and Law Enforcement
Criminal Law Procedure and Due Process