首页> 外文学位 >DISCRETIONARY JUSTICE WITHIN LOCAL PAROLE SYSTEMS IN CALIFORNIA: A COMPARATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS BETWEEN LOS ANGELES AND SAN FRANCISCO COUNTIES
【24h】

DISCRETIONARY JUSTICE WITHIN LOCAL PAROLE SYSTEMS IN CALIFORNIA: A COMPARATIVE ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS BETWEEN LOS ANGELES AND SAN FRANCISCO COUNTIES

机译:加利福尼亚州当地假释制度中的酌处权司法制度:洛杉矶与旧金山县之间的比较性组织分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

The relationship between law and local bureaucratic application presents a rather paradoxical situation for social control in a democratic society. The exercise of discretion within agencies of social control reflects personal judgments in the interpretation of the law. The social processes within the local parole system provides an ideal research setting to examine the exercise of discretionary justice. Los Angeles County and San Francisco County parole systems serve as examples of how the exercise of discretionary powers contributes to the management and control of deviant populations.;The purpose of this study is to show how discretion is created, established, and exercised by parole authorities in order to meet agency goals and needs. For example, when the goal of an agency is to passively administer the laws governing that agency, discretion is exercised in the minimum application of the law as illustrated in Los Angeles County. Conversely, when the goal of an agency is to actively administer the law, discretion is exercised in the maximum application of the law as exampled in San Francisco County.;The tension between social control and due process objectives is reflected in these two divergent approaches to the parole function in California. Methods of data collection included field observation, indepth interviews, content analysis, case studies, and survey research. Through a comparative organizational analysis of Los Angeles and San Francisco counties, this study of discretionary justice has important implications in the emergence and maintenance of definitions of deviance through the discretionary powers granted to agencies of social control. Discretion within the day-to-day social organization of criminal justice administrations such as county parole can, under certain circumstances, reflect the increasing bureaucratization of the law. In an effort to contribute to the theoretical understanding of deviance and social control, this study tries to help explain the conditions under which discretion is exercised within two criminal justice agencies.
机译:法律与地方官僚应用之间的关系为民主社会中的社会控制提出了一个相当矛盾的情况。在社会控制机构内部行使自由裁量权反映了法律解释中的个人判断。当地假释制度中的社会过程为检查酌处司法制度的实施提供了理想的研究环境。洛杉矶县和旧金山县的假释制度是行使自由裁量权如何对越轨人口的管理和控制做出贡献的示例。本研究的目的是展示假释当局如何创建,确立和行使酌处权。为了达到代理商的目标和需求。例如,当代理机构的目标是被动地管理管辖该代理机构的法律时,在洛杉矶县所示的最低限度法律适用范围内行使酌处权。相反,当代理机构的目标是积极执行法律时,将酌情决定权发挥最大作用,如旧金山县所例举的那样;社会控制与正当程序目标之间的张力体现在这两种不同的解决方法中。加州的假释功能。数据收集的方法包括现场观察,深入访谈,内容分析,案例研究和调查研究。通过对洛杉矶和旧金山县的比较组织分析,对自由裁量权司法的研究对于通过授予社会控制机构的自由裁量权对偏差定义的出现和维持具有重要意义。在某些情况下,刑事司法机关(如县级假释)在日常社会组织中的自由裁量权可以反映出法律日益官僚化的情况。为了有助于对偏差和社会控制的理论理解,本研究试图帮助解释在两个刑事司法机构中行使酌处权的条件。

著录项

  • 作者

    TAKATA, SUSAN REIKO.;

  • 作者单位

    University of California, Berkeley.;

  • 授予单位 University of California, Berkeley.;
  • 学科 Criminology.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1983
  • 页码 254 p.
  • 总页数 254
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号