Most prosecutors are never challenged for re-election, reports the Waco Tribune-Herald in a very thoughtful review by reporter Cindy V. Culp.
Culp also wrote a very detailed story about how look at the performance of a prosecutor's office.
The first article identifies questions that incumbent prosecutors ought to be asked:
Questions that should be asked include:
* Is the prosecutor being thoughtful about priorities for his office, or is he just going with the flow?
* To what extent does the prosecutor hold other attorneys in the office accountable for the choices they make? How does he do that — for example, does he sample their work periodically?
* Is there general waste? Are resources being thrown at crimes that don’t really deserve them?
* How accurate is the office in evaluating cases? Put another way, how often do the crimes defendants are convicted of match up with the crimes they were initially charged with?
[University of Arizona law professor Marc] Miller, who has extensively studied prosecutor decision making, said he would add these additional questions:
* What guidelines govern whether prosecutors pursue cases or decline them?
* What percent of the cases that prosecutors receive from law enforcement are pursued?
* For cases not pursued, what are the general reasons?
This is excellent journalism. Sphere: Related Content