Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
The criminal justice system isn't just a linear process—it's a carefully designed series of constitutional checkpoints that balance two competing interests: society's need to prosecute crime and the individual's right to due process. Every stage you'll study represents a deliberate decision point where cases can be filtered out, rights must be protected, and discretion shapes outcomes. You're being tested on how these stages interact, where discretionary power lies at each point, and how the system reflects broader tensions between crime control and due process models.
Understanding these stages also reveals why the system produces the outcomes it does—from plea bargaining dominating case resolution to racial and socioeconomic disparities emerging at multiple decision points. Don't just memorize the sequence; know what constitutional protections apply at each stage, who holds discretionary power, and how cases flow (or get filtered) through the system. That conceptual understanding is what separates strong exam answers from simple recall.
Before anyone enters the formal justice system, law enforcement must establish legal grounds to act. This stage is governed by the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. The standard here is probable cause—a reasonable belief that a crime has been committed.
Compare: Investigation vs. Arrest—both require probable cause, but investigation builds it while arrest acts on it. The key discretionary moment is when police decide evidence is "enough." FRQs often ask about how police discretion at these early stages contributes to system disparities.
Once arrested, suspects transition from police custody to court jurisdiction. These stages ensure defendants understand their situation and that pretrial liberty decisions are made fairly. The Sixth Amendment right to counsel attaches at these critical stages.
Compare: Initial Appearance vs. Arraignment—both involve court appearances, but initial appearance focuses on rights notification and detention decisions, while arraignment centers on the formal plea. Know which constitutional protections apply at each.
The justice system is often described as a funnel—many cases enter, but few reach trial. These stages determine which cases proceed and which are filtered out. Prosecutorial discretion is at its peak here, making these stages critical for understanding system outcomes.
Compare: Preliminary Hearing vs. Grand Jury—both screen cases, but preliminary hearings are adversarial (defense participates) while grand jury proceedings are one-sided. Some jurisdictions use one, some use both, and some allow prosecutors to choose. This is a common exam distinction.
Trial represents the full expression of adversarial justice, where prosecution and defense present competing narratives. The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy, public trial by an impartial jury. However, remember that trials are statistically rare given plea bargaining's dominance.
Compare: Plea Bargaining vs. Trial—both resolve cases, but plea bargaining prioritizes efficiency and certainty while trials prioritize adversarial testing of evidence. The dominance of plea bargaining raises questions about whether the constitutional right to trial has become largely symbolic.
After a guilty verdict or plea, the system shifts focus from determining guilt to administering consequences. These stages reflect ongoing tensions between punishment, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation as competing goals.
Compare: Sentencing vs. Corrections—sentencing determines the official punishment, but corrections implements it. Parole boards and correctional officials exercise significant discretion in how sentences are actually served, meaning the "real" punishment often differs from what the judge ordered.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Fourth Amendment protections | Investigation, Arrest |
| Probable cause standard | Investigation, Arrest, Preliminary Hearing |
| Sixth Amendment rights | Initial Appearance, Arraignment, Trial |
| Prosecutorial discretion | Plea Bargaining, Grand Jury, Charging decisions |
| Case filtering/attrition | Preliminary Hearing, Grand Jury, Plea Bargaining |
| Defendant's plea options | Arraignment |
| Burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) | Trial |
| Post-conviction discretion | Sentencing, Corrections, Parole |
Which two stages both involve probable cause determinations, and how do they differ in who makes the decision and what happens next?
A defendant cannot afford bail and remains in jail for months awaiting trial. At which stage did this outcome occur, and what constitutional amendment is relevant to bail decisions?
Compare and contrast the preliminary hearing and grand jury—what function do both serve, and why might a defendant prefer one over the other?
If an FRQ asks you to explain why plea bargaining dominates American criminal justice, which stages would you reference to show how the system incentivizes guilty pleas?
At which post-conviction stages does discretionary decision-making continue to shape a defendant's actual experience, and how might this create disparities between similarly sentenced offenders?