Prepare a 1,400- to 1,750-word paper in which you evaluate discretionary authority exercised by personnel in the various fields of the criminal justice system. What role does a civilian oversight...

Discretionary Authority
Running Head: DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY
1
PAGE
9
DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY
Discretionary Authority
Name
Institution
Discretionary Authority
Introduction
The criminal justice system has a profusion of formal laws and procedures, which govern how the system works. However, whether a suspected criminal offender will go through the justice system and the treatment he or she would get is often, largely, dependent on the discretionary authority imbued on the officials in all levels within this system (Main, 2006). Hence, at various levels and stages of the criminal justice system, discretionary decisions are often made by public officials to determine the suspected offender’s innocence. Such discretionary decisions may result to treatment, attitudes, or behaviours, which may not be subject to the formal legal procedures (Banks, n.d.). Hence, it is imperative to understand what entails discretionary authority within the justice system. This treatise evaluates this authority and further assesses the role that a civilian oversight committee has in ensuring that such discretionary authority is used properly and not abused.
Evaluation of Discretionary Authority in the Criminal Justice System
Discretionary authority is the authority given to public officials to choose a certain course of action with regard to a situation, without such course of action spelled out by the legislation in advance (Main, 2006). Officials in the criminal justice often use this authority when there are limitations to power in regards to choosing an action from other possible courses of action or inaction. The key reason for the existence of discretionary authority is that the law may not always spell out rules that can be used to deal with all situations that may arise.
Discretionary authority, which criminal justice officers exercise, is often more critical since such powers determine whether individual suspected of crime losses their liberty, life or property. Police officers, the correctional staff, judges may exercise this discretion or court related personnel, and probation and parole personnel.
Chapman and McConnell (2012) assert that the police force uses discretionary authority in exercising professional judgement within a give situation as well as determine how best to prevent a crime from occurring or how to apprehend a criminal. Some of the decisions that the police make include patrol decisions or decisions whether to make an arrest or not, decisions with regard to maintaining order for instance dealing with a riot, and decisions on crime investigations. Furthermore, the police have discretionary power where juveniles’ issues are present (Main, 2006). For instance, they may handle reprimand and release of juvenile delinquents, or they also refer them to juvenile homes. Factors that may influence the police to use their discretion may include the seriousness of an offence or previous record or police interpretation of an individual’s reaction.
On the other hand, court official such as judges also practice discretion in choosing one decision among various competing decision points with regard to various court cases. For instance, judges administer justice and often have the discretion to pursue courses of action they view as just, fair and lawful. Discretionary authority is especially a very important and core judicial function, since judges are at the discretion of granting or denying a petition. By conferring such authorities, the system entrusts the officials to make informed and sound decisions taking into account various courses actions that can be taken (Chapman & McConnell,...