Public prosecution is an indispensable feature of the modern day administration of criminal justice. Public prosecution as we know it today, however, is a product of long evolution. Historically, pursuit of crime was a private affair and there was no official involvement in criminal prosecution. This article explores the development of criminal prosecution in England, on the European continent, and in America. The first part of the article traces the evolution of modes of accusation in England and on the European continent. The second part of the article focuses on the development of prosecution in America from the colonial days until the formation of the modern American prosecutorial system. The article highlights the historical events that contributed to the evolution and transition of modes of prosecution and analyzes the impact of different historical, cultural, and political values on the shaping of the present prosecutorial systems in Europe and in America.
Albrecht, H.J. (2000). Criminal prosecution: Developments, trends and open questions in the Federal Republic of Germany. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, 8(3), 245-256.
2.
Alschuler, A.W. (2005). Narrative and normativity: Comments on the origin of adversary criminal trial. The Journal of Legal History , 26(1), 91-97.
3.
American Bar Association. (1971). Standards relating to the prosecution function and the defense functions. New York: Institute of Judicial Administration .
4.
Aumann, F.R. (1969). The changing American legal system: Some selected phases. New York: Da Capo Press .
5.
Bar, C.L.V. (1916). A history of continental criminal law. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
6.
Batiza, R. (1958). The Influence of Spanish Law in Louisiana. Tulane Law Review, 33, 29-34.
7.
Baudouin, L. (1958). The influence of the Code Napoleon. Tulane Law Review, 33, 21-28.
8.
Bennion, F. (1986). The new prosecution arrangements: (1) The Crown Prosecution Service. Criminal Law Review, 1986, 3-15.
9.
Berkson, L.C. (1980). Judicial selection in the United States. Judicature, 64(4), 176-193.
10.
Biemel v. State, 37 N.W. 244 (Wis. 1888).
11.
Blankenburg, E., & Treiber, H. (1985). The establishment of public prosecutor's office in Germany. International Journal of the Sociology of Law , 13, 375-391.
12.
Bordenkircher v. Hayes, 434 U.S. 357 (1978).
13.
Chapin, B. (1983). Criminal justice in colonial America, 1606-1660 . Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press.
14.
Cardenas, J. (1986). Crime victim in the prosecutorial process. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 9, 357-398.
15.
Chitwood, O.P. (1905). Justice in colonial Virginia. Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.
16.
Critchley, T.A. (1972). A history of police in England and Wales. Montclair, NJ: Patterson Smith.
17.
Coffey, M.A., & Norman, J.B. (1978). Selected problems of the Louisiana grand jury . Tulane Law Review, 52, 707-768.
18.
Commonwealth v. Wheeler, 2 Mass. 172 (1806).
19.
Confiscation Cases, 74 U.S. 454 (1868).
20.
Corso, P. (1993). Italy. In C. Van Den Wyngaert (Ed.), Criminal procedure systems in the European community (pp. 223-260). London: Butterworths .
21.
Davis, A. (2001). The American prosecution: Independence, power and the threat of tyranny. Iowa Law Review, 86, 393-465.
22.
Davis, K.C. (1969). Discretionary justice. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press.
23.
De Long, E.H., & Baker, N.F. (1932). The prosecuting attorney. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 23, 926-963.
24.
Devlin, P. (1958). The criminal prosecution in England. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25.
Devlin, P. (1966). Police procedure, administration, and organization . London: Butterworth.
26.
Douglas, D. C. (Ed.). (1953-1975 ). English historical documents (Vols. 2-3). New York: Oxford University Press.
27.
Dubber, M.D. (1997). American plea bargains, German lay judges, and the crisis of criminal procedure. Stanford Law Review, 49, 547-605.
28.
Emsley, C. (1991). The English police: A political and social history . New York: St. Martin's Press .
29.
Esmein, A. (1913). A history of continental criminal procedure. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
30.
Establishment of the judicial courts of the United States (September 24, 1789) § 35. (1848). In The public statutes at large of the United States of America (Vol. 1). Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown.
31.
Farnsworth, E.A. (1983). An introduction to the legal system of the United States. London: Oceana Publications, Inc.
32.
Feeney, F. (1998). German and American Prosecutors: An approach to statistical comparison. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
33.
Fionda, J. (1995). Public prosecutors and discretion. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
34.
Fisher, G. (2003). Plea bargaining's triumph. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
35.
Fitzgerald, M., & Muncie, J. (1983). System of justice: An introduction to the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Oxford, UK: Basil and Blackwell.
36.
Flaherty, A.H. (1969). An introduction to early American legal history . In D. H. Flaherty (Ed.), Essays in the history of early American law (pp. 3-38.). Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.
37.
Forsyth, W. (1852). History of trial by jury. London: J. W. Parker.
38.
Frase, R.S. (1990). Comparative criminal justice as a guide to American law reform: How do the French do it, how can we find out, and why should we care?California Law Review, 78(3), 539-683.
39.
Frase, R.S., & Weigend, T. (1995). German criminal justice as a guide to American law reform: Similar problems, better solutions?Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, 18, 317-360.
40.
Friedman, L.M. (1985). A history of American law. New York: Simon & Schuster.
41.
Galie, P.J. (1996). Ordered liberty: A constitutional history of New York. New York: Fordham University Press.
42.
Gershman, B.L. (1992). The new prosecutors. University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 53, 393-458.
43.
Glendon, M.A., Gordon, M.W., & Osakwe, C. (1985). Comparative legal traditions. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co.
44.
Goldman, S., & Jahnige, T.P. (1985). The federal courts as a political system. New York: McGraw-Hill.
45.
Goldstein, A.S. (1981). The passive judiciary: Prosecutorial discretion and the guilty plea. Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press.
46.
Goulka, J.E. (2002). The first constitutional right to criminal appeal: Louisiana's Constitution of 1845 and the clash of the common law and natural law traditions. The Tulane European and Civil Law Forum, 17, 151-196.
47.
Graham, M. (1983). Tightening the reins of justice in America. Westport, CT: Greenwood.
48.
Green, B.A. (1999). Why should prosecutors "seek justice?" Fordham Urban Law Journal, 26, 607-643.
49.
Grosman, B.A. (1969). The prosecutor: An inquiry into the exercise of discretion. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
50.
Hasbury's Statutes of England and Wales (Vol. 12). (1989). London: Butterworths.
51.
Huber, B. (1996). Criminal procedure in Germany. In J. Hatchard, B. Huber , & R. Vogler (Eds.), Comparative criminal procedure (pp. 96-175) London: The British Institute of International and Comparative Law.
52.
Jacoby, J.E. (1980). The American prosecutor: A search for identity . Toronto, ON, Canada: Lexington Books.
53.
Justice. (1970). The prosecution process in England and Wales. London: Committee of Justice.
54.
Kress, J.M. (1976). Progress and prosecution. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 423, 99-116.
55.
Kühne, H.H. (1993). Germany. In C. Van Den Wyngaert (Ed.), Criminal procedure systems in the European community (pp. 137-162). London: Butterworths.
56.
Kurland, P.B., & Waters, D.W.M. (1959). Public prosecutions in England, 1854-79: An essay in English legislative history. Duke Law Journal, 4, 493-562.
57.
Kury, H., Kaiser, M., & Teske, R. (1994). The position of the victim in criminal procedure: Results of a German study. International Review of Victomology , 3, 66-81.
58.
Lambert, K.A. (1992). The suffocation of a legal heritage: A comparative analysis of civil procedure in Louisiana and France; The corruption of Louisiana's civilian tradition. Tulane Law Review, 67, 231-269.
59.
Langbein, J.H. (1974). Prosecuting crime in the renaissance: England, Germany, France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
60.
Langbein, J.H. (2003). The origins of adversary criminal trial. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
61.
Lee, M. (1901). A history of police in England. London: Methuen.
62.
Levasseur, A.A. (1996). The major periods of Louisiana legal history. Loyola Law Review, 41, 585-628.
63.
McCain, P.M. (1954). The country court in North Carolina before 1750 . Durham, NC: Duke University Press .
64.
McConville, M., & Mirsky, C. (1995). The rise of guilty pleas: New York, 1800-1865 , Journal of Law and Society, 22, 443-474.
65.
McMullan, J.L. (1996). The new improved monied police: Reform, crime control, and the commodification of policing in London. British Journal of Criminology, 36, 85-108.
66.
Merryman, J.H. (1985). The civil law tradition. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
67.
Miller, W.R. (1999). Cops and bobbies: Police authority in New York and London, 1830-1870. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
68.
Morrison, F.L. (1973). Courts and the political process in England. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
69.
Mueller, G.O.W., & Poole-Griffiths, F.L. (1969). Comparative criminal procedure. New York: New York University Press.
70.
National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement. (1931). Report on prosecution. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
71.
Newman, G. (1978). The punishment response. Philadelphia : Lippincott.
72.
Page, E.L. (1959). Judicial beginnings in New Hampshire: 1640-1700 . Concord, NH: New Hampshire Historical Society.
73.
Pencak, W., & Holt, W. W., Jr. (Eds.). (1989). The law in America: 1607-1861. New York: The New York Historical Society.
74.
People v. Pohl, 47 Ill. App. 2d 232, 197 N.E.2d 759 (1964).
75.
People v. Wabash, St. Louis, and Pacific Railway Company, 12 Ill. App. 263 (1882).
76.
Pizzi, W.T. (1993). Understanding prosecutorial discretion in the United States: Limits of comparative criminal procedure as an instrument of reform. Ohio State Law Journal, 54, 1325-1373.
77.
Plucknett, T.F.T. (1956). A concise history of the common law. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
78.
Poserina, J.J. (1959). Appointed attorney general's power to supercede an elected district attorney. Temple Law Quarterly, 33, 78-88.
79.
Prosecution of Offences Act, §6 (1985).
80.
Radzinowicz, L. (1957). A history of English criminal law and its administration from 1750: The movement for reform, 1750-1833. New York : The Macmillan Company.
81.
Ramsey, C.B. (2002). The discretionary power of "public" prosecutors in historical perspective. American Criminal Law Review, 39, 1309-1393.
82.
Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure. (1981 ). Report Cmnd. 8092. London: HMSO.
83.
Šelih, A. (2000). The prosecution process and the (changing) role of the prosecutor. In Council of Europe Publishing (Ed.), Crime and criminal justice in Europe (pp. 93-107). Strasbourg , France: Council of Europe Publishing.
84.
Semmes, R. (1938). Crime and punishment in early Maryland. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
85.
Sheehan, A.V. (1975). Criminal procedure in Scotland and France. Edinburgh, UK: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.
86.
Smith, A.T.H. (1993). England and Wales. In C. Van Den Wyngaert (Ed.), Criminal procedure systems in the European community (pp. 73-104). London: Butterworths.
87.
Spielmann, A., & Spielmann, D. (1993). Luxembourg. In C. Van Den Wyngaert (Ed.), Criminal procedure systems in the European community (pp. 261-278). London: Butterworths.
88.
Steinberg, A. (1984). From private prosecution to plea bargaining: Criminal prosecution, the district attorney, and American legal history. Crime & Delinquency, 30, 568-592.
89.
Steinberg, A. (1989). The transformation of criminal justice, Philadelphia 1800-1880. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
90.
Stuntz, W. (2002). The pathological politics of criminal law. Michigan Law Review, 100, 505-600.
91.
Swart, A.H.J. (1993). The Netherlands. In C. Van Den Wyngaert (Ed.), Criminal procedure systems in the European community (pp. 279-316). London: Butterworths.
92.
Teske, R., & Albrecht, H. (1992) Prosecution and sentencing patterns in the Federal Republic of Germany. International Criminal Justice Review , 2(1), 76-104.
93.
United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (1996).
94.
United States v. Chemical Foundation, 272 U.S. 1 (1926).
95.
United States v. Goodwin, 457 U.S. 368 (1982).
96.
Uviller, H.R. (1973). The virtuous prosecutor in quest for an ethical standard: Guidance from the ABA. Michigan Law Review, 71, 1145-1168.
97.
Van Alstyne, W.S. (1952). The district attorney: A historical puzzle. Wisconsin Law Review1952, 125-138.
98.
Van Caenegem, R.C. (1991). Legal history: A European perspective. London: The Hambledon Press.
99.
Verrest, P. (2000). The French public prosecution. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminology, 8(3), 210-244.
100.
Vorenberg, J. (1981). Decent restraint of prosecutorial power. Harvard Law Review, 94, 1521-1573.
101.
Vouin, R. (1970). The role of the prosecutor in French criminal trials. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 18, 483-497.
102.
Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598 (1985).
103.
West, A., Desdevises, Y., Fenet, A., Gaurier, D., & Heussaff, M.C. (1993). The French legal system: An introduction. London: Format Publishing.
104.
Whitman, J.Q. (2003). Harsh justice: Criminal punishment and the widening divide between America and Europe. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
105.
Wilson v. County of Marshall, 257 Ill. App. 220 (1930).
106.
Yardley, D.C.M. (1979). English courts of law. Oxford , UK: Oxford University Press.
107.
Zacharias, F.C. (2001). The professional discipline of prosecutors. North Carolina Law Review, 79, 721-778.
108.
Zweigert, K., & Kötz, H. (1987). Introduction to comparative law. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
