Lloyd E. Ohlin is Touroff-Glueck Professor of Criminal Justice Emeritus at Harvard Law School. Frank J. Remington is Professor of Law at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

• Acknowledgments Foreword by Michael Tonry 1. Surveying Discretion by Criminal Justice Decision MakersLloyd E. Ohlin The American Bar Foundation Survey The Survey OriginsResearch MethodologyMajor Observations of the Survey The Pilot Project Reports and the Survey BooksThe Impact of Ideology on Practice and ResearchPolicy Choices 2. Confronting the Complexity of the Policing FunctionHerman Goldstein IntroductionThe State of Knowledge Before the ABF SurveyThe American Bar Foundation Survey MethodologySubstantive Findings Developments Since the ABF Survey The Varied Nature of the Police FunctionThe Infinite Variety of Situations Police Are Called on to HandleThe Varied Uses of ArrestThe Prevalence of Discretion on PolicingThe Police Decision Not to ArrestThe Criminal Justice System as a System Conclusion 3. The Decision to Charge, the Decision to Convict on a Plea of Guilty, and the Impact of Sentence Structure on Prosecution PracticesFrank J. Remington IntroductionThe Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions as Seen in the Pre-ABF Research The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionSummary The Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions in the ABF Research The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionLessons Learned in the ABF Research on Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions Post-ABF Developments The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionThe Changing of Roles of Trial Judge, Prosecuter, Defense Counsel, and Victim in the Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions Conclusion 4. Sentencing, Parole, and Community SupervisionWalter J. Dickey IntroductionPre-ABF Research and Developments Classical and Positivist TheoriesImplementation of Rehabilitative Theory in American PracticesIdeological Framework of the Pre-ABF ResearchPre-ABF Research FindingsSentencing Discretion in Pre-ABF ResearchConclusions on Pre-ABF Research The American Bar Foundation Research Trial Judge Sentencing in Wisconsin as Described by the ABF ResearchParole Release in WisconsinProbation and Parole Supervision in WisconsinSignificance of the ABF Research Post-ABF Research and Developments The Experience in WisconsinAfter the ABF Survey—Sentencing and Parole Release Conclusion: Discretion in Sentencing and Corrections on the National Scene 5. Criminal Justice Responses to Domestic ViolenceRaymond I. Parnas The ABF Survey's Contribution to Domestic Violence IssuesRelated Developments on Domestic Violence IssuesInfluences on the Development of Full Enforcement PoliciesResearch Findings on Full EnforcementThe Future: From Low Visibility to High Visibility; From Adjustment to Arrest; So What? 6. Police Rule Making and the Fourth Amendment: The Role of the CourtsWayne R. LaFave Police Rule Making and the Fourth AmendmentImpoundments and Inventories: The Bertine "Standardized Procedure" RequirementInspections: The Camera "Reasonable...Administrative Standards" RequirementStops: By "Plan" or By "Profile"Arrests: Police Limits on Force and CustodyThe Role of the Courts to DateRemaining Problem AreasDenouement 7. The American Bar Foundation Survey and the Development of Criminal Justice Higher EducationDonald J. Newman Criminal Justice Education Development of Educational MaterialsSummer Seminars for Legal and Social Science ScholarsLaw Student Summer Field Placements in Criminal Justice AgenciesProblems with Teaching and Researching Criminal Justice in Law School Settings Creation of the State University of New York and the First School of Criminal Justice Governor Nelson Rockefeller and the State University of New YorkOrigins of the School of Criminal Justice at AlbanyThe Role of Eliot LumbardMeeting the Personnel Needs of Criminal Justice AgenciesEarly Consultants to the Albany SchoolThe Planning Year: Creation of the Albany ModelCriminal Justice Education DefinedGraduate Curriculum in Criminal Justice: The Albany ModelStructure of the School: Faculty and Student CriteriaThe Albany School After Twenty Years The Spread of Criminal Justice Higher Education The Federal Office of Manpower and TrainingCriminal Justice Education ProselytizersThe Creation of the Academy of Criminal Justice SciencesSurvival After the Demise of LEAALocation and Identity in Universities and CollegesLocation on New and Secondary CampusesWhy Survival and Growth? The American Bar Foundation Survey and Criminal Justice Education Today Major Contributions of the ABF Survey to Criminal Justice Higher EducationContrary Developments and Unanticipated Consequences in the Academic Field of Criminal Justice The Future off Criminal Justice Education Solidifying the FieldLocation on Prestigious CampusesNew Student PopulationsCurriculum StandardizationsResearch TrendsIncreased Professionalism of On-Line Personnel Conclusion Appendix A: About the Authors Appendix B: Project Participants Index

"In the 1950s the American Bar Foundation conducted a pilot survey of the processing of offenders from arrest to prison—to observe what actually happened at each decision point, instead of assuming that doctrinal legal analyses were sufficient. This book consists of original, authoritative, and well written essays by leading scholars in law and criminal justice, who worked on the ABF project. All, including the editors, are among the most eminent figures in criminal law and procedures, criminal justice, and the law and society movement. Each contributor provides a wealth of insights and information regarding the famous pre-ABF crime surveys, the ABF studies themselves, and post-ABF research." — Austin Turk, University of California-Riverside"It is a fascinating retrospective account of the research done decades ago by the American Bar Foundation's Survey of Criminal Justice. Many of the chief participants in that multi-volume Survey write here about the consequences of the earlier research for subsequent scholarship, teaching, and policy. In so doing, they elucidate a crucial problem of the criminal justice system: how to decide when discretion is needed and when it must be constrained if the system is to enhance efficiency and avoid injustice."— Richard D. Schwartz, Syracuse University College of Law

Lloyd E. Ohlin is Touroff-Glueck Professor of Criminal Justice Emeritus at Harvard Law School. Frank J. Remington is Professor of Law at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

• Acknowledgments Foreword by Michael Tonry 1. Surveying Discretion by Criminal Justice Decision MakersLloyd E. Ohlin The American Bar Foundation Survey The Survey OriginsResearch MethodologyMajor Observations of the Survey The Pilot Project Reports and the Survey BooksThe Impact of Ideology on Practice and ResearchPolicy Choices 2. Confronting the Complexity of the Policing FunctionHerman Goldstein IntroductionThe State of Knowledge Before the ABF SurveyThe American Bar Foundation Survey MethodologySubstantive Findings Developments Since the ABF Survey The Varied Nature of the Police FunctionThe Infinite Variety of Situations Police Are Called on to HandleThe Varied Uses of ArrestThe Prevalence of Discretion on PolicingThe Police Decision Not to ArrestThe Criminal Justice System as a System Conclusion 3. The Decision to Charge, the Decision to Convict on a Plea of Guilty, and the Impact of Sentence Structure on Prosecution PracticesFrank J. Remington IntroductionThe Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions as Seen in the Pre-ABF Research The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionSummary The Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions in the ABF Research The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionLessons Learned in the ABF Research on Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions Post-ABF Developments The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionThe Changing of Roles of Trial Judge, Prosecuter, Defense Counsel, and Victim in the Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions Conclusion 4. Sentencing, Parole, and Community SupervisionWalter J. Dickey IntroductionPre-ABF Research and Developments Classical and Positivist TheoriesImplementation of Rehabilitative Theory in American PracticesIdeological Framework of the Pre-ABF ResearchPre-ABF Research FindingsSentencing Discretion in Pre-ABF ResearchConclusions on Pre-ABF Research The American Bar Foundation Research Trial Judge Sentencing in Wisconsin as Described by the ABF ResearchParole Release in WisconsinProbation and Parole Supervision in WisconsinSignificance of the ABF Research Post-ABF Research and Developments The Experience in WisconsinAfter the ABF Survey—Sentencing and Parole Release Conclusion: Discretion in Sentencing and Corrections on the National Scene 5. Criminal Justice Responses to Domestic ViolenceRaymond I. Parnas The ABF Survey's Contribution to Domestic Violence IssuesRelated Developments on Domestic Violence IssuesInfluences on the Development of Full Enforcement PoliciesResearch Findings on Full EnforcementThe Future: From Low Visibility to High Visibility; From Adjustment to Arrest; So What? 6. Police Rule Making and the Fourth Amendment: The Role of the CourtsWayne R. LaFave Police Rule Making and the Fourth AmendmentImpoundments and Inventories: The Bertine "Standardized Procedure" RequirementInspections: The Camera "Reasonable...Administrative Standards" RequirementStops: By "Plan" or By "Profile"Arrests: Police Limits on Force and CustodyThe Role of the Courts to DateRemaining Problem AreasDenouement 7. The American Bar Foundation Survey and the Development of Criminal Justice Higher EducationDonald J. Newman Criminal Justice Education Development of Educational MaterialsSummer Seminars for Legal and Social Science ScholarsLaw Student Summer Field Placements in Criminal Justice AgenciesProblems with Teaching and Researching Criminal Justice in Law School Settings Creation of the State University of New York and the First School of Criminal Justice Governor Nelson Rockefeller and the State University of New YorkOrigins of the School of Criminal Justice at AlbanyThe Role of Eliot LumbardMeeting the Personnel Needs of Criminal Justice AgenciesEarly Consultants to the Albany SchoolThe Planning Year: Creation of the Albany ModelCriminal Justice Education DefinedGraduate Curriculum in Criminal Justice: The Albany ModelStructure of the School: Faculty and Student CriteriaThe Albany School After Twenty Years The Spread of Criminal Justice Higher Education The Federal Office of Manpower and TrainingCriminal Justice Education ProselytizersThe Creation of the Academy of Criminal Justice SciencesSurvival After the Demise of LEAALocation and Identity in Universities and CollegesLocation on New and Secondary CampusesWhy Survival and Growth? The American Bar Foundation Survey and Criminal Justice Education Today Major Contributions of the ABF Survey to Criminal Justice Higher EducationContrary Developments and Unanticipated Consequences in the Academic Field of Criminal Justice The Future off Criminal Justice Education Solidifying the FieldLocation on Prestigious CampusesNew Student PopulationsCurriculum StandardizationsResearch TrendsIncreased Professionalism of On-Line Personnel Conclusion Appendix A: About the Authors Appendix B: Project Participants Index

"In the 1950s the American Bar Foundation conducted a pilot survey of the processing of offenders from arrest to prison—to observe what actually happened at each decision point, instead of assuming that doctrinal legal analyses were sufficient. This book consists of original, authoritative, and well written essays by leading scholars in law and criminal justice, who worked on the ABF project. All, including the editors, are among the most eminent figures in criminal law and procedures, criminal justice, and the law and society movement. Each contributor provides a wealth of insights and information regarding the famous pre-ABF crime surveys, the ABF studies themselves, and post-ABF research." — Austin Turk, University of California-Riverside"It is a fascinating retrospective account of the research done decades ago by the American Bar Foundation's Survey of Criminal Justice. Many of the chief participants in that multi-volume Survey write here about the consequences of the earlier research for subsequent scholarship, teaching, and policy. In so doing, they elucidate a crucial problem of the criminal justice system: how to decide when discretion is needed and when it must be constrained if the system is to enhance efficiency and avoid injustice."— Richard D. Schwartz, Syracuse University College of Law

Lloyd E. Ohlin is Touroff-Glueck Professor of Criminal Justice Emeritus at Harvard Law School. Frank J. Remington is Professor of Law at the University of Wisconsin Law School.

• Acknowledgments Foreword by Michael Tonry 1. Surveying Discretion by Criminal Justice Decision MakersLloyd E. Ohlin The American Bar Foundation Survey The Survey OriginsResearch MethodologyMajor Observations of the Survey The Pilot Project Reports and the Survey BooksThe Impact of Ideology on Practice and ResearchPolicy Choices 2. Confronting the Complexity of the Policing FunctionHerman Goldstein IntroductionThe State of Knowledge Before the ABF SurveyThe American Bar Foundation Survey MethodologySubstantive Findings Developments Since the ABF Survey The Varied Nature of the Police FunctionThe Infinite Variety of Situations Police Are Called on to HandleThe Varied Uses of ArrestThe Prevalence of Discretion on PolicingThe Police Decision Not to ArrestThe Criminal Justice System as a System Conclusion 3. The Decision to Charge, the Decision to Convict on a Plea of Guilty, and the Impact of Sentence Structure on Prosecution PracticesFrank J. Remington IntroductionThe Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions as Seen in the Pre-ABF Research The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionSummary The Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions in the ABF Research The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionLessons Learned in the ABF Research on Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions Post-ABF Developments The Charging DecisionThe Guilty Plea DecisionThe Changing of Roles of Trial Judge, Prosecuter, Defense Counsel, and Victim in the Charging and Guilty Plea Decisions Conclusion 4. Sentencing, Parole, and Community SupervisionWalter J. Dickey IntroductionPre-ABF Research and Developments Classical and Positivist TheoriesImplementation of Rehabilitative Theory in American PracticesIdeological Framework of the Pre-ABF ResearchPre-ABF Research FindingsSentencing Discretion in Pre-ABF ResearchConclusions on Pre-ABF Research The American Bar Foundation Research Trial Judge Sentencing in Wisconsin as Described by the ABF ResearchParole Release in WisconsinProbation and Parole Supervision in WisconsinSignificance of the ABF Research Post-ABF Research and Developments The Experience in WisconsinAfter the ABF Survey—Sentencing and Parole Release Conclusion: Discretion in Sentencing and Corrections on the National Scene 5. Criminal Justice Responses to Domestic ViolenceRaymond I. Parnas The ABF Survey's Contribution to Domestic Violence IssuesRelated Developments on Domestic Violence IssuesInfluences on the Development of Full Enforcement PoliciesResearch Findings on Full EnforcementThe Future: From Low Visibility to High Visibility; From Adjustment to Arrest; So What? 6. Police Rule Making and the Fourth Amendment: The Role of the CourtsWayne R. LaFave Police Rule Making and the Fourth AmendmentImpoundments and Inventories: The Bertine "Standardized Procedure" RequirementInspections: The Camera "Reasonable...Administrative Standards" RequirementStops: By "Plan" or By "Profile"Arrests: Police Limits on Force and CustodyThe Role of the Courts to DateRemaining Problem AreasDenouement 7. The American Bar Foundation Survey and the Development of Criminal Justice Higher EducationDonald J. Newman Criminal Justice Education Development of Educational MaterialsSummer Seminars for Legal and Social Science ScholarsLaw Student Summer Field Placements in Criminal Justice AgenciesProblems with Teaching and Researching Criminal Justice in Law School Settings Creation of the State University of New York and the First School of Criminal Justice Governor Nelson Rockefeller and the State University of New YorkOrigins of the School of Criminal Justice at AlbanyThe Role of Eliot LumbardMeeting the Personnel Needs of Criminal Justice AgenciesEarly Consultants to the Albany SchoolThe Planning Year: Creation of the Albany ModelCriminal Justice Education DefinedGraduate Curriculum in Criminal Justice: The Albany ModelStructure of the School: Faculty and Student CriteriaThe Albany School After Twenty Years The Spread of Criminal Justice Higher Education The Federal Office of Manpower and TrainingCriminal Justice Education ProselytizersThe Creation of the Academy of Criminal Justice SciencesSurvival After the Demise of LEAALocation and Identity in Universities and CollegesLocation on New and Secondary CampusesWhy Survival and Growth? The American Bar Foundation Survey and Criminal Justice Education Today Major Contributions of the ABF Survey to Criminal Justice Higher EducationContrary Developments and Unanticipated Consequences in the Academic Field of Criminal Justice The Future off Criminal Justice Education Solidifying the FieldLocation on Prestigious CampusesNew Student PopulationsCurriculum StandardizationsResearch TrendsIncreased Professionalism of On-Line Personnel Conclusion Appendix A: About the Authors Appendix B: Project Participants Index

"In the 1950s the American Bar Foundation conducted a pilot survey of the processing of offenders from arrest to prison—to observe what actually happened at each decision point, instead of assuming that doctrinal legal analyses were sufficient. This book consists of original, authoritative, and well written essays by leading scholars in law and criminal justice, who worked on the ABF project. All, including the editors, are among the most eminent figures in criminal law and procedures, criminal justice, and the law and society movement. Each contributor provides a wealth of insights and information regarding the famous pre-ABF crime surveys, the ABF studies themselves, and post-ABF research." — Austin Turk, University of California-Riverside"It is a fascinating retrospective account of the research done decades ago by the American Bar Foundation's Survey of Criminal Justice. Many of the chief participants in that multi-volume Survey write here about the consequences of the earlier research for subsequent scholarship, teaching, and policy. In so doing, they elucidate a crucial problem of the criminal justice system: how to decide when discretion is needed and when it must be constrained if the system is to enhance efficiency and avoid injustice."— Richard D. Schwartz, Syracuse University College of Law