Essay Sample on Discretion and Ethical Decision Making

Introduction

Discretion entails decisions made with lawful authority and not for illegal reasons because, in its legal context, it prohibits law enforcement agents from operating illegally. Discretion is critical within policing due to the functioning of the police department and the relationship between the police and the public. Particularly, police are faced with situations where they have to exercise discretion when making decisions, and for these decisions to be classified as discretionary, they must be made in legal settings (Schulenberg, 2015). Discretion is not only applied within policing but also the other two arms of the criminal justice system, namely, courts and corrections. In the case scenario, the use of discretion could change the outcome of the events from the activities of the police to court process as well as the decision made by the state's attorney.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The Police Perspective

Discretion is a form of judgment that gives police the authority to utilize knowledge, skills, and insights when they encounter unpredictable situations (Schulenberg, 2015). When discretion is used in getting consent to search the house rather than the actual search warrant, the process of investigation is hastened, which is a way of providing justice for the victim. In the case scenario, police discretion would have allowed law enforcement agents to search the suspects without obtaining a search warrant. According to Schulenberg (2015), police discretion enables them to search the suspects' area of immediate control and the car they were using during the crime. Therefore, the evidence that was used to incriminate the suspect could have been obtained with much ease when using discretion thus allowing the police to conclude the investigation process within a shorter time, compared to when they are required to get a search warrant from the judicial official.

The Courts' Perspective

Once the investigations are concluded and the case forwarded to the state attorney, the prosecution is tasked with the responsibility of seeking justice (Howell, 2014). Prosecutorial discretion entails the authority of the state attorney to decide the criminal charges to bring in the case. Moreover, the prosecutor's discretion allows the state attorney to whether prosecute or not after reviewing the evidence provided by the police. The prosecuting attorney could have used discretion in deciding the agreement pleas for the case, based on the finding from the investigations. When charging the two suspects in the state attorney could determine the criminal charges to press, and in this case, the prosecution has different charges for the suspects. Although the two suspects were involved in the robbery that left one victim dead, Suspect 2 was only a gateway driver, and during investigations, he cooperated with the police leading to the finding of the evidence that was used during the prosecution process. As such, acting under the prosecutor's discretion, the state attorney chose the charges to be filed regardless of the charge for which the suspect was arrested (Howell, 2014). While the police arrested the two suspects for robbery with violence and murder, the second suspect was only charged with involvement in the robbery. Therefore, the prosecution used discretion as leverage against Suspect 2.

The discretion that was used to file charges for the second suspect could also be used for the first suspect after reviewing the facts presented. In the scenario, the state seeks the death penalty for the first suspect. If the state attorney decides not to seek the death penalty, it will be the prosecution's discretion and the decision will not be opposed (Howell, 2014). However, it will change the outcome of the case by giving a defendant with major charges a lenient sentence. Notably, as mentioned above, the responsibility of the prosecution is to get justice for the victims and ensure a fair trial process. As such, resolving not to seek the death penalty might be interpreted differently by the victims' family, which will not be justice to them.

Corrections' Perspective

Correction is one of the three elements of the criminal justice system and once the criminal process at the police and courts are complete and a sentence is imposed, the convicted individual is handed over to the correctional and probationary offers. Corrections are responsible for ensuring the recommended sentence is given and monitored (Steen et al., 2013). The corrections' discretion applies to both correctional and probation officer. In the case scenario, after the sentences for the suspect have been approved, the first suspect could be handed to correctional officers who may use their discretion to decide whether the convict will be in solitary confinement or part of the general prison population. The second suspect was remorseful for the victims, and by sentencing him to life in prison, the correctional officer could decide whether he deserves parole or not after observing him during his sentence. Therefore, from corrections' perspective, correctional officers also have the discretion to determine the fate of an individual in prison.

Discretion in the criminal justice system allows decision-making among law enforcement agencies, and while the decision might not always be favorable, law enforcement officers can exercise their judgments. Discretion from the police perspective allows them to decide whether to arrest a suspect or not as well as the search of areas of the suspect's immediate control. In courts, discretion enables the prosecution to decide on the charges to file and the sentence to recommend. Lastly, in correlations, correctional and probation officers use their discretion to ensure they implement and monitor the recommended sentence because they decide if the convict will be in confinement or general prison population.

References

Howell, K. B. (2014). Prosecutorial discretion and the duty to seek justice in an overburdened criminal justice Ssystem. Geo. J. Legal Ethics, 27, 285.

Schulenberg, J. L. (2015). Moving beyond arrest and reconceptualizing police discretion: An investigation into the factors affecting conversation, assistance, and criminal charges. Police Quarterly, 18(3), 244-271.

Steen, S., Opsal, T., Lovegrove, P., & McKinzey, S. (2013). Putting parolees back in prison: discretion and the parole revocation process. Criminal justice review, 38(1), 70-93.