Type:	Journal Article
Title:	Court oversight and conviction under mandatory and nonmandatory domestic violence case filing policies
Other Titles:	Criminology and Public Policy
Authors:	Peterson, Richard R Dixon, Jo
Keywords:	Criminal justice responses;Policy
Year:	2005
Publisher:	Blackwell Publishing
Citation:	4 (3), August 2005
Notes:	This US article assesses the impact that domestic violence filing policies in New York have on the criminal justice goals (prevalence of court oversight, duration of court oversight and conviction) of prosecutors processing domestic violence misdemeanours. It discusses the advantages and disadvantages of mandatory and non-mandatory domestic violence case filing policies. Under mandatory filing policies, prosecutors file charges in almost all domestic violence cases regardless of the victim’s participation or the strength of the evidence. They often proceed without the victim by using ‘hearsay exceptions’ such as photographs, police testimony, medical reports, physical evidence or taped calls to police assistance. No previous studies of domestic violence case processing analysed misdemeanour cases to assess the relative impact that the filing policies (mandatory and non-mandatory) have on the criminal justice goals of court oversight and conviction. If found that the prevalence and duration of court oversight are greater under a mandatory domestic violence filing policy. The domestic violence filing policy is found to be one of the strongest predictors of the likelihood of conviction even after controlling for other differences in legal, case processing and defendant characteristics. It finds that domestic violence policies have a significant impact on all 3 goals (prevalence of court oversight, duration of court oversight and conviction).
URI:	https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/14043
Appears in Collections:	Journal Articles

Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.