SHAWN TURAK: AN OBSERVATION OF ASSISTANT PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS

A Field Research ProjectSubmitted in Fulfillment

Of the requirements of POLS 331(Criminal Law Policy)

Submitted toProf. Richard Brisbin

ByStacey L. Stoneking

West Virginia UniversityNovember 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE 1

Introduction 4Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys 5Shawn Turak 5

Education, Training, and Selection 4Required Education 5On-the-Job Training 5Selection to Position 5

Routines 1Motions and Briefs 5Hearings 5Issuing Subpoenas 5Plea Bargaining 5Bail 5Trials 5

Interactions 4Engaging Other Attorneys 5Contact with Judges 5Victim/Witness Interaction 5Consultations with Police Officers 5Victim Rights Groups 5Communication with Superior(s) 5Jury Involvement 5

Ethics 4Disclosure of Evidence 5Conflict of Interest 5Issues with Current Court System 5

Subjects of Interest 1Effects of Media Portrayal 5Differences Between Jobs 5

Analysis and ImplicationsAdversarial Ideals versus Bureaucratic Politics 5Power of Legal Professionals 5Effects on Order in the Community 5Implications for the Constitutive Function of Law and Legal Action 5Law About Enforcement of Norms (Bureaucratic Model) 5Adversary Process Rendered Symbolic? 5

Conclusion 1

INTRODUCTION

Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys

The role of the assistant prosecuting attorney is to represent the victims of criminal

activities. The American criminal justice system centers on the role of the prosecutor

(Neubauer and Fradella, 138). They are involved in a variety of judicial functions, such as

issuing subpoenas, writing motions, and, less frequently, arguing trials, as well as remaining

in constant communication with a multitude of judicial actors. They are a center of power in

the criminal justice process and are opposed in that power by defense attorneys and judges.

Shawn Turak

Shawn Turak is a West Virginia assistant prosecuting attorney for Ohio County. She

is typically assigned cases dealing with “non-violent crimes such as grand larceny, forgery,

fraud…any white-collar crimes” and also the “sexual assault cases (primarily adult victims

anywhere from the age of twelve and up)” (Turak). The interview was conducted with Turak

on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 at 2p.m. in the Prosecutor’s Office of the City County

Building in Wheeling, WV.

EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND SELECTION

The position of attorney has continuously been viewed as prestigious occupation. The

profession requires a great deal of higher education, training, and skill. However, the position

of assistant district attorney is a small field and requires that your accomplishments be

notable in order to gain favor for selection.

Required Education

The position of assistant district attorney requires a bachelors degree from an

accredited university, a three-year law school degree, and passing of the bar exam for the

state(s) in which you choose to practice. Shawn Turak received her college degree from

Wake Forest University in North Carolina. She then attended law school at the University of

Pittsburgh. Due to relocating, she passed the bar exams and is licensed to practice law in

Pennsylvania, Maryland, and West Virginia (Turak).

Further education is required throughout an attorney’s career. The law is always

changing; this requires attorneys to remain up-to-date on these changing standards. To

accomplish this, lawyers are obligated to engage in continuing legal education. Turak stated

that she is required by the state bar to participate in twenty-four hours of education every two

years (Turak).

On-the-Job Training

Training in the legal field has remained relatively unchanged in recent years. “For

decades, training in prosecutors’ offices was almost exclusively on the job; it was not

unusual for recent law school graduates with no experience to be sent into court on their first

day on the job” (Neubauer and Fradella, 148).” This remains true today; many prosecutors

are not given a great deal of on the job training. Without specified training attorneys are left

with “little familiarity with the day-to-day realities of the profession” (Neubauer and

Fradella, 147). Turak said that she was permitted to “shadow for a day or two,” but that, even

after receiving a formalized legal education, the integration process into the assistant district

prosecutor position tends to be “sink or swim” (Turak).

Selection to Position

Before being selected as assistant prosecuting attorney, Turak spent ten years working

with civil cases. She “started out in magistrate court” which conducts preliminary hearing to

determine whether to bind the case over to the grand jury. From that position, the elected

prosecutor, Scott Smith, who was familiar with her work, requested her as assistant. This

statement affirms Neubauer and Fradella’s claim that “greater stress is being placed on merit

selection” (Neubauer and Fradella, 147).

Turnover, however, is a problem for assistant district attorneys. The workload and

constant criminal interaction weighs heavily on prosecutors. This results in a high turnover

rate, with assistant district attorneys only spending three to six years in the position

(Neubauer and Fradella, 147). Nevertheless, Turak has remained an assistant prosecuting

attorney for Ohio County for nine years. She admits, however, “most people don’t like their

job as much as I do” (Turak).

ROUTINES

As one of the full time assistant district prosecuting attorneys, Turak roughly

schedules a forty-hour workweek, however, she stated that when working on larger cases

with upcoming trials she can work around sixty to seventy hours a week in preparation

(Turak). Turak explained that she is involved in many different functions on a daily basis.

She specifically mentioned that she is “usually in court” and “responsible for engaging in

hearings, issuing subpoenas”

Motions and Briefs

Motions and briefs are written documents that request the court to perform a specific

action. The motion is a specific request of the court. The brief provides legal support or

authority. It states why the facts dictate a certain outcome under the law. Simply stated, the

brief provides the reasoning behind the request. That being the case, these two written works

are usually combined into one document.

Attorneys are constantly using motions and briefs to accomplish many different tasks,

such as venue change or questioning interrogation methods. They are more likely to be

prompted by the defense counsel. They occupy a significant amount of an attorneys’ time;

however, they are fairly repetitive from case to case. Specific details differ, but the format

remains the same.

Hearings

If there is an issue before or during the trial that cannot be settled strictly with a

motion/brief, then the issue is scheduled for a hearing. The attorneys meet with the judge to

argue their aspect of the issue. There may be an optional preliminary hearing to assess

probable cause (Brisbin). There are various issues that may be brought to the court before a

trial, such as to contest an aspect of pretrial actions. There may be a challenge of the

sufficiency of the indictment or search and seizure. It may be an attempt to disregard

evidence through the exclusionary rule, which “prohibits the prosecutor from using illegally

obtained evidence during trial,” or it may be the ‘fruit of the poisonous tree’, which is

“evidence indirectly obtained as a result of a constitutional violation” (Neubauer and

Fradella, 285). There could also be a bond hearing, in which arguments could be made by the

defense counselor contesting the amount set for bond (Turak). There are many possible

issues that the attorney’s could argue in order to gain an advantage over their opponent.

Issuing Subpoenas

Assistant district prosecutors are also responsible for issuing subpoenas. A subpoena

is a mandatory request for evidence. The term subpoena is Latin for “under penalty,” as seen

in the fact that the holder of the evidence is punishable by law if they fail to comply. These

documents are always directed to the holder of the evidence or records. Subpoenas generally

request records, but they could be for any evidence. Neubauer and Fradella explain it well

stating “under the court’s authority, the grand jury may issue a subpoena requiring an

individual to appear before the grand jury to testify and/or bring papers and other evidence

for its consideration” (Neubauer and Fradella, 247).

Plea Bargaining

The plea bargaining process is a constant undertaking for attorneys. Plea bargaining

involves several subsets of judicial bargaining including plea bargaining, charge bargaining,

count bargaining, and sentence bargaining. Turak indicated that she uses each type of

bargaining regularly (Turak). According to Neubauer and Fradella, the main reasons for plea

bargaining are the risks and expenses of trials. They also argue that plea bargaining gives

attorneys the opportunity to “individualize justice” (Neubauer and Fradella, 318). Turak

stated that one of her central motivations for plea bargaining is “to save certain victims from

testifying” (Turak).

The prosecutor usually initiates the plea bargaining process, however, the defense

attorney is able to initiate the procedure. There are no specific regulations requiring

discussions to be made in person or in writing; however, a Boykin form must be filled out to

ensure no coercion, adequate representation, and a general understanding of the action

(Neubauer and Fradella, 323). Turak prefers the plea bargain in writing to ensure accuracy

and validity (Turak).

There are variations on what the penalty will be, Turak stated that “precedent doesn’t

govern what [they] do; it depends on the facts of the case” and that it is extremely rare to

“absolutely refuse to make any offers” (Turak). (Turak stated that only one case came to

mind where this occurred.) The bargaining offer, according to Turak, is individualized,

determined by “the facts of the case, the person’s criminal history,” and “the victim and

officer’s input would be a factor” (Turak). There is always a possibility that the judge may

reject the plea bargain, however, this does not happen very often. In Ohio County, the judges

only accept non-binging plea agreements, meaning that the judge is not bound by the plea

bargain agreement and that there is discretion of the court (Turak).

Bail

Neubauer and Fradella state, “bail is a guarantee” (Neubauer and Fradella, 260). Its

purpose is to ensure the defendant’s presence at trial. Bail may be a cash bond, a property

bond, or you could simply be released on recognizance, which means that the court trusts that

you will appear at your trial (Neubauer and Fradella, 260).

The influence that an attorney has on bail amounts differs. According to Turak, the

influence that she has on the monetary amount varies based on the stage of the criminal

process; however, the Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail (Turak). The amount set

reflects the seriousness of the crime and the defendant’s flight risk. In 1984, Bail Reform Act

permitted the judge to “consider danger to the community” when setting bail amounts

(Neubauer and Fradella, 262).

The collateral required to secure personal freedom before trial causes certain people

believe that bail is an infringement of the presumption of innocence and disregards the

burden of proof required for conviction. Turak disagrees. She states the “primary purpose is

to secure presence at trial” (Turak). The Supreme Court case, U.S. v. Salerno, held that the

“federal preventive detention law does not violate the Eigth Amendment” (Neubauer and

Fradella, 262).

Trials

Assistant prosecuting attorneys deal with a great deal of cases. Many of which do not

reach the trial stage. However, Turak believes they handle “a lot of jury trials” and said that

they handled “two in a few month, one was a 3-day sexual assault case trial” (Turak).

Once a jury has been selected, the trial process begins with opening statements,

initiated by the prosecution. The prosecutor will then attempt to explain to the jury the

burden of proof and the term ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ (Brisbin). After the defense’s

opening statement, the sequence of witnesses and cross-examinations occurs. After the

witnesses have been allowed to speak and are cross-examined, closing statements begin (with

the prosecution leading). The prosecution is then allowed a rebuttal after the defense’s

closing argument. It is then up to the jury and the judge.

INTERACTIONS

Prosecuting attorneys interact with a great deal of judicial system actors. These

interactions consume a great deal of their time (Neubauer and Fradella, 151). The method of

communication varies between actors; however, personal meeting, telephone, and email are

the most common.

Engaging Other Attorneys

Prosecutors constantly interact with other attorneys. Turak explained that, in her area,

most of the attorneys are local to Ohio County. The public defenders’ office, for example,

has only four attorneys. “You tend to know the person you are dealing with and …what their

style is. One [defense attorney], for example, will routinely go to trial. [Another] routinely

likes to plead cases out.” (Turak). There is continual interaction throughout the pretrial and

trial processes during motions, hearings, arraignment, plea bargaining, and trials.

“[Attorneys] are the biggest part of who we deal with” (Turak).

Contact with Judges

The majority of contact with judges is in the courtroom during trials and hearings

(Turak). Contrary to popular belief, the judge is more of a mediator in the criminal justice

process, leaving the prosecutor to be the central power.

Turak explained that Ohio County is part of the 1st Judicial Circuit along with

Hancock and Brook County. She tends to work with several circuit court judges, including

judges James Mazzone and Arthur Recht (who are assigned to the criminal docket) as well as

the four elected magistrate court judges that she works with on a regular basis (Turak).

Attorneys occasionally use the limited number of judges to their advantage, to speed the

process up by anticipating what each requires or prefers. Turak stated that she “probably

take[s] into consideration, particularly in the circuit court, different preferences of the

judges.” As an example of doing this she said that “with one particular judge, …if something

comes up at the last minute he might be more inclined to just address it immediately,

whereas, the other judge might want to have a brief written, a motion filed, and consider all

the law before making a decision” (Turak).

Victim/Witness Interaction

The victim, according to Turak, is given a fairly significant amount of involvement in

deciding how the case will proceed. For example, Turak takes the victim’s desires into

account before discussing plea bargaining options with the defense (Turak). Attorneys

remain in close contact with the victim to discuss the “status of the prosecution” (Turak).

During a grand jury, jury trial, and a bench trial, the prosecution has the right to call

witnesses. These witnesses testify in court to present information. Victims are often called to

testify on the details of the crime, such as the identity of the perpetrator. Witnesses could be

experts (subpoenaed by formality) who are called in to testify the validity of a certain field

(psychiatrists, physicians, and forensic specialists are common expert witnesses). These

specialists could be referred to the prosecuting attorney or they could be specialists of the

state police crime lab (Turak). Police officers are also called upon to testify.

Consultations with Police Officers

Attorneys are also in close contact with police officers. Prosecutors consult officers

on what charge would be applicable (given the facts of the case) and what evidence will be

necessary for that charge or conviction (Turak). As briefly mentioned in the previous section,

police officers may be called as witnesses. If an aspect of the investigation is being contested,

the police officer that made the arrest or performed the search in question may be asked to

testify under oath.

Occasionally, attorneys and officers may have conflicting relationships due to the

“differing perspectives on the law” (i.e. stricter penalties for convicted criminals) (Neubauer

and Fradella, 154). However, Turak stated that her relationship with the officers she deals

with is “pretty positive” and that those good relations are important to her (Turak). She

regularly involves the officers in her cases and takes their opinions into account when

considering plea bargains and bail amounts. She stated “I solicit their opinions on how they

would like to see cases resolved because they do a lot of work to help us be protected … and

do our jobs well; I think they have just as much say in things” (Turak).

Jury Involvement

Assistant district attorneys are involved with grand juries and trial juries. The grand

jury is responsible for formally indicting individuals. The attorneys discuss their arguments

and evidence and the grand jury decides whether to return a true bill, which is a formal

charge against the individual (Brisbin). The grand jury members are selected randomly from

the citizen pool. The number of jurors that sit on a grand jury varies by state, seating fifteen

in West Virginia. If the grand jury indicts, then there is an arraignment to decide if the

individual will be held until trial. Assistant prosecuting attorneys also work with trial juries

and are involved in jury selection. Turak stated, “it’s not what it looks like on TV” (Turak).

The judge will “conduct the flow of questions to perspective jurors” for basic elimination of

jurors (Turak). The lawyers, then, are permitted to interview the potential jurors. A certain

number of challenges are permitted that will exclude or dismiss certain jurors; these may be

challenges for cause or preemptory challenges that require no stated justification.

Victim Rights Groups

Victims Right Groups are another actor commonly associated with prosecutors. Two

examples Turak mentioned were the “Sexual Assault Help Center” that advocates for victims

of sexual assault and also the YWCA has a family violence advocate that helps with the

domestic cases. They are also who we work with on a regular basis” and they “like to be

present for court” (Turak).

Communication with Superior

Prosecutors tend to be given a great deal of freedom. Neubauer and Fradella explain

that one reason is that specific rules or policies are not directly stated (Neubauer and

Fradella, 149). Turak admitted that she has a great deal of “flexibility” and her main

reasoning was also that “nothing is every black and white here” (Turak).

Turak’s superior, Scott Smith, the elected prosecutor, has “a high degree of control

over the assignment of cases” (Turak), however he “puts a lot of trust in us” and “allows us

to use our judgement as we deem appropriate in the cases” (Turak). This prosecutorial

freemdom directly coordinates with the concern for the power of prosecutors that will be

discussed later.

ETHICS

Ethics are a large part of the legal system. Many processes are subject to ethical

reforms. Just as the law continues to change, new ethical problems arise which results in a

portion of the required continued education for attorneys to be dedicated to "mandatory

ethics requirements” (Turak).

Disclosure of Evidence

One ethical issue for attorneys is the disclosure of evidence. This “can get prosecutors

in a lot of trouble is the failure to give …exculpatory evidence. Exculpatory evidence is

anything that could negate or take away the showing of guilt.” (Turak). Turak explained

further stating that “a prosecutor might have a DNA report that shows that the DNA found on

the victim didn’t belong to the [person] charged with the crime. If that prosecutor neglected

to, deliberately or not (maybe accidentally), failed to turn that over that could eradicate the

conviction” (Turak). However, attorneys are rarely sanctioned for their actions if caught, the

main effect is an “appellate reversal” (Neubauer and Fradella, 150).

Turak mentioned the Brady rule as “the biggest ethical rule that governs

prosecutors…we have to turn it all over” (Turak). Brady v. Maryland (1963) held that “the

suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due

process,” however, this rule is “limited to admissible…exculpatory evidence that is material”

(Neubauer and Fradella, 282). Turning over this evidence is an obligation that lawyers must

submit to to ensure honest justice.

Conflict of Interest

Another ethical issue for attorneys is conflict of interest. “Prosecutors are prohibited

from engaging in representation that would compromise their loyalty to their clients”

(Neubauer and Fradella, 180). However, Turak argued that even though conflict of interest is

seen in the prosecutor’s office she believes that it is more of an issue from a defense

standpoint (Turak).

Issues with Current Court System

In terms of fairness, Turak stated, “West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals revised

the way it takes cases, now everyone has a mandatory right to appeal and that’s good. I think

that was a very positive step” (Turak). While discussing her area she stated, “we have great

attorneys in this area, we have excellent judges, we have a good system.”

There are many issues with the current court system that require consideration. Turak

says that she is aware of these issues, but believes that the best solution would be “more

money for the court system, for the prosecutors office, for the public defenders office. We all

could benefit from more resources. It seems like we are always trying to make do with a

shoestring budget” (Turak). On a more personal note, the only issue Turak found with her

position was balancing family life with her workload (Turak). Her area, on the other hand,

has a significant drug problem that she mentioned and attributed many of the lesser crimes

she handles to those addictions (Turak).

Reforms are proliferating in the criminal justice system, such as reforms concerning

bail, court delay, the power of prosecutors, and various aspects of the system. Turak

mentioned two reforms that occurred within the last five years. These reforms were the

institution of a “drug court and a mental health court” that are attempting to deal with the

drug and competency issues (Turak). She admits that she “agrees that the principle itself is a

good principle…” but she is uncertain whether she “fully agree[s] with how the drug court

handles all of its cases” (Turak). Turak explained this stating her belief that “the best thing to

do with a person charged with a crime is not to throw him in prison, but to try to get him

help. If you can do that, if the fact of the case warrant doing that then I think that’s a better

result in the end for everybody.” (Turak)

SUBJECTS OF INTEREST

Effects of Media Portrayal

The demand for crime dramas, such as CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, NCIS: Naval

Criminal Investigative Service, and the many Law and Order series spin-offs, has increased

dramatically. These shows include significant aspects of the criminal justice system. There is

extensive upheaval about the inaccuracies of many of these shows; however, they also have

unseen effects on the criminal justice system. Neubauer and Fradella comment extensively

on Law and Order, stating that it has had “a major impact on the American legal system” and

that it “often distorts policing and prosecution beyond recognition” (Neubauer and Fradella,

121). Turak explained one consequence of these shows; one continuing education course

termed it “the CSI effect.” She said that this is the tendency of citizens to expect the

extraneous amounts of forensic evidence that the media displays (Turak). This becomes a

problem when those citizens sit on a jury and refuse to convict a criminal due to this “lack”

of evidence. What the public fails to recognize is that, according to certain experts, “upwards

of 40 percent” of the technologies depicted in crime dramas do not actually exist (Neubauer

and Fradella, 354). These shows provide entertainment and an “idealistic version” of the

criminal justice system, they often display prosecutors as “the good guys,” but these unseen

effects are disconcerting (Turak).

Differences Between Civil and Criminal Attorney

As previously stated, Turak has remained an assistant prosecuting attorney for Ohio

County for nine years. She formerly was working in civil court. She discussed the differences

that she saw in the two positions during the interview. “You are dealing with people’s lives

when you’re here…you are not negotiating dollars and cents…this is how many years of a

person’s life are you going to take away by seeking punishment in a corrections facility. You

are affecting more than one person if that person has a family. It’s very real here” she said,

“It’s about as real as it can be… My eyes were opened up quite a bit” (Turak).

ANALYSIS AND IMPLICATIONS

Conflicts Between Adversarial Ideals and Bureaucratic Politics

There are many conflicts, too many to mention, between adversarial ideals (law on

the books) and bureaucratic politics (law in action). One example of these differences that

correlates with assistant prosecuting attorneys is case attrition. “Law on the books

perspective suggests a mechanical process – cases more almost automatically from one

pretrial stage to the next. In sharp contrast, the law in action perspective emphasizes a

dynamic process – cases are likely to be eliminated during these early stages” (Neubauer and

Fradella, 250). “Relationships among the major actors in the criminal justice system, the

pattern of informal authority within the courtroom work group, the backlog of cases on the

court’s docket, and community standards defining serious criminal activity” are just a few

reasons causing case attrition. This is just one example of many of how ideals are simply not

always reality.

Power of Legal Professionals

There are political concerns regarding the amount of power held by legal

professionals, especially the power of the prosecutor. “Power has increasingly been

concentrated in the hands of the prosecutor” (Neubauer and Fradella, 138). Assistant

prosecuting attorneys require and sustain a great deal of control throughout the criminal legal

process. “Prosecutors occupy a uniquely powerful and highly visible position in a complex

and conflict-filled environment” (Neubauer and Fradella, 138). Turak agreed stating, “there

is a lot of power and you have to be very careful with it” (Turak). Prosecutors inadvertently

reinforce this power. As discussed, this is another issue that distresses citizens and legal

authorities. There are various attempts to establish greater supervision for assistant

prosecuting attorneys due to “concern that autonomy allows too much unchecked discretion”

(Neubauer and Fradella, 149).

Effects on Order in the Community

“Crime prevention is recognized as a legitimate prosecutorial goal” (Neubauer and

Fradella, 154). The reduction of crime and the chastisement of criminals is essential for order

to be maintained in communities. “The most effective results are obtained within small,

manageable, geographic areas…Change is more likely to occur through cooperative efforts

or partnerships, rather than prosecutorial dictates” (Neubauer and Fradella, 154). Cooperation

with others actors in the criminal justice system will achieve more than single-handedly

confronting the issue, for example, Turak works with the Victims Rights Groups to help gain

awareness and help reduce the issues.

Implications for the Constitutive Function of Law and Legal Action

As previously mentioned, Turak stated that believes “the best thing to do with a

person charged with a crime is not to throw him in prison, but to try to get him help” (Turak).

This statement proves beneficial in implicating that Turak is not seeking, at least in drug-

related crimes, reprimand for the sake of reprimand. There is a component of bettering the

community involved in healing the addictions of its members. This is evidence to the

possibility that Turak sees the function of law and legal action as just that, “seek justice” by

maintaining a well-organized, law-abiding community.

Law About the Enforcement of Norms (Bureaucratic Model)

The law is constantly changing, as seen in the continuing education requirement for

attorneys. The change occurs in response to changing norms. From issues of bail settings in

criminal law to the constitutional matters concerning gay marriage, laws change based on the

incremental variations of norms. Criminal law is not dictated by precedent, but is a “case-by-

case” evaluation. Trial outcomes are subject to jury decision; jurors are fixated on what is

acceptable. There is decent evidence to argue that the law is about the enforcement of norms,

more so than simple decision-making. Legal actors are not attempting to change the world,

but rather, protect the status quo. The function of the legal system is to maintain order, not

create utopia.

Adversary Process Rendered Symbolic?

The adversary process of criminal justice is not rendered symbolic in light of the

power of the prosecutor. It is a check on that power. It functions to “argue for legal

innocence” in order to ensure the prosecutors argument is valid (Neubauer and Fradella,

168). The defense attorney is another form of referree for the prosecution.

CONCLUSION

Shawn Turak is an assistant prosecuting attorney for Ohio County in West Virginia.

The position of assistant prosecuting attorney was examined based on the responses to an

interview conducted in November 2011.

The American criminal justice system centers on the role of the prosecutor, which

establishes it as a position of power. Assistant prosecuting attorneys represent the recipients

of criminal actions. They perform a multitude of criminal legal tasks, interactions, and ethical

decisions on a daily basis. Some of the basic tasks discussed were motions/briefs, hearings,

plea bargaining, bail, and trials. Interactions of an assistant prosecuting attorney are other

attorneys, judges, witnesses, victims, police officers, jurors, victim rights groups, and the

elected prosecutor. Ethical issues were also discussed, such as the disclosure of evidence and

conflict of interest. The evaluation contains observations concerning the assistant prosecuting

attorney’s position based on the interview responses; these included questions on the central

function of law and conflicts between law in the books and law in action. The occupation is a

multi-faceted position of legal power that affects the entire criminal justice system.

PERSONAL CRITIQUE

More should have been asked about Turak’s feelings toward the law and its function.

The duties of the position could have been more detailed, more information on the

trial activities, discovery, and arraignment.

More definite answers on Turak’s opinions of the current court system would have

been helpful.

More information could have been provided on the different types of jury interaction:

grand jury, trial jury

More information on her selection to position.

Works Cited

Brisbin, Richard. Interview. Political Science 331: Criminal Law Policy. Stacey Stoneking. 1-29 November 2011.

Neubauer, David W. and Henry F. Fradella. America's Courts and the Criminal Justice System. 10. Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2011.

Turak, Shawn. Personal Interview Stacey Stoneking. 22 November 2011.