Reforming the Federal Grand Jury and the State Preliminary Hearing to Prevent Conviction Without Adjudication

Arenella, Peter

Journal: Michigan Law Review

Volume: 78

First Page: 463

Year: 1980

Bluebook Citation: 78 MICH. L. REV. 463 (1980)

Author: Peter L. Arenella: all 6 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

Cited
6
Citing decisions
3
Courts citing

Citations by decade

3
3
1980s1990s

Courts citing this journal article

Conn.3
Mass.2
U.S.1
Most recently cited by6

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

It is this Article's thesis that the substitution of plea-bargaining for the criminal trial as our primary method for determining legal guilt requires a fundamental reassessment of our pretrial screening processes. In a system where the prosecutor's decision to file charges is usually followed by a negotiated guilty plea, we can no longer pretend that the pretrial process does not adjudicate the defendant's guilt. Accordingly, this Article argues that it no longer makes sense to rely primarily on the trial to safeguard essential accusatorial principles when pretrial screening devices like the preliminary hearing and the grand jury perform the only independent adjudication of the defendant's guilt before conviction in most cases.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.