James P. Levine

Jury Toughness: The Impact of Conservatism On Criminal Court Verdicts

An analysis of criminal court verdicts after trials with and without juries shows that, contrary to popular belief, juries are acting tougher than judges in deliberating the fate of defendants. Study of 58,336 trials of persons charged with felonies in six states and the District of Columbia shows that juries convict substantially more often than judges trying cases alone. The slightly contrary results in two other jurisdictions are explained by special circumstances. The phenomenon of jury toughness is seen to be the result of changes in the dominant po litical ideology, as trend data on federal court verdicts show an increasing rate of jury convictions since the 1950s as a response to the growth of popular conserva tism on criminal justice issues. Jurors, as representing the body politic, have used their discretion over fact finding as their means of expressing indignation about crime and dealing harshly with criminals.

Community Corrections as an Organizational Innovation: What Works and Why

The contemporary emphasis of criminal justice policy on incapacitation of felony offenders has ironically opened up a window of opportunity for the expansion of alternatives to incarceration, including community corrections. This study analyzes the organizational diffusion of state-mandated community corrections policy in Connecticut, Colorado, and Oregon. Specifically, we measure the degrees of implementation in each state and analyze the organizational conditions that contribute to successful implementation. Also, we present a model of transformative rationality that points to the theoretical underpinnings of successful implementation. It identifies organizational conditions that are necessary to maintain a commitment to the fundamental premises of policy while simultaneously encouraging constructive adaptation of the policy to local environments.

The case study as a jury research methodology

Abstract The case study is defended as a methodology for jury research. The weaknesses of this approach are identified, including lack of internal and external validity. A number of advantages of the case study are then set forth, such as their heuristic value in generating hypotheses about jury behavior and their role in helping understand problematic verdicts in celebrated cases. The article concludes with a discussion of techniques to enhance the quality of case studies among which are attention to careful data collection, consideration of plausible rival hypotheses competing with the interpretation of jury decisions being advanced, and the placing of findings in a larger theoretical context.

Federal crime legislation through the eyes of Alexis de Tocquiville

The political process entailed in the passage of federal crime legislation in 1994 and the revisions of it being considered in 1995 are analyzed as a manifestation of three central themes about American politics articulated by Alexis de Tocqueville inDemocracy in America published in 1835. It is argued that “crackdown” measures of dubious value in fighting crime are the result of majoritarianism, a national consensus favoring very conservative crime policies. A second factor at work is pluralism, the strong role played by interest groups in American politics. Thirdly, the racial politics which De Tocqueville thought were destined to plague the United States indefinitely are shown to form a backdrop to the formulation of crime control measures. The article concludes with a discussion of a strategy for the development of more enlightened crime policies in the face of stark realities about the nature of the policy-making process.

Review essay / jury wisdom

Norman J. Finkel, Commonsense Justice: Jurors’ Notions of the Law Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995, 390pp.