Publication Cover
Victims & Offenders
An International Journal of Evidence-based Research, Policy, and Practice
Volume 7, 2012 - Issue 2
1,444
Views
6
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Where Do I Stand?: An Exploration of the Rules That Regulate Victim Participation in the Criminal Justice System

Pages 161-184 | Published online: 10 Apr 2012
 

Abstract

The victims' rights movement has helped promote opportunities for victim participation within the criminal justice system. One such opportunity, the creation and delivery of a victim impact statement, has generated significant empirical attention. Most of this research explores the effects of participation on specific outcomes (e.g., sentencing, victim satisfaction). Yet relatively little is known about the implementation of victim participation in the courtroom by criminal justice workers. Using trial transcripts, courtroom observations, and interviews with criminal justice officials and victims, the current study examines the rules that regulate victim participation, revealing how victims are incorporated into the justice process.

Notes

1. In general, opportunities for victim participation and notification are differentiated from enforceable rights. For example, New York State Executive Law Article 2 states that victims of certain felony-level crimes should be consulted by a district attorney in order for the prosecutor to obtain the victim's views regarding the case. Yet failure to do so “shall not be cause for delaying the proceedings against the defendant nor shall it affect the validity of a conviction, judgment or order.”

2. Research on the experiences of families of homicide victims has used a number of different terms to describe this group including survivors, indirect victims, secondary victims (CitationKarmen, 2010) and covictims (CitationVollum & Longmire, 2007). This study refers to families of crime victims as “victims” or “families of crime victims.”

3. Victims of misdemeanor crimes can create a written victim impact statement for a presentence investigation report. Allocution is generally not permitted.

4. See New York State Criminal Procedure Law § 380.50.

5. New York State Criminal Procedure Law § 380.50.

6. 45/47 of observed cases; 97/101 of collected transcripts; 26/28 of interviewees.

7. In Citation People v. Arroyo (2001), Citation People v. Iovinella (2002), and Citation People v. Harrington (2005) New York judges ruled that multiple members of one family were allowed to deliver impact statements in court at sentencing.

8. Individuals interviewed were not asked about the number of victim impact statements delivered at sentencing, so this information is not available.

9. These guidelines can be viewed on the New York State Unified Court System Web site at http://www.nycourts.gov/rules/chiefjudge/34.shtml.

10. Rules of the Chief Judge, Part 34, Guidelines for New York State Court Facilities, Guideline VI.3: Design guidelines for security, from http://www.nycourts.gov/rules/chiefjudge/34.shtml

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 53.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 234.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.