Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

History of the Public Prosecutor

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Public Prosecutors in the United States and Europe

  • 901 Accesses

Abstract

Before discussing the role of American and Swiss prosecutors, this chapter outlines the origins of the public prosecutor in both countries. The understanding of their current position begins with their historical origins. A comparative analysis of the evolution of the U.S. prosecutorial system with the Swiss system also helps to identify and understand the differences between both systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The birth of the American public prosecutor is sometimes seen as a “historical puzzle” (see van Alstyne 1952, p. 125; Shoemaker 2005, p. 339; Gittler 1984, p. 127; Kress 1976, p. 100).

  2. 2.

    Shoemaker (2005), pp. 341 and 355; Jacoby (1980), p. 3; see also Langbein (1973), pp. 313 and 315. The same conclusion is drawn for England (see Kurland and Waters 1959, p. 493).

  3. 3.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 11–16; Worrall (2008), pp. 4–5.

  4. 4.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 3.

  5. 5.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 3.

  6. 6.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 5.

  7. 7.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 6. See also Miller (1970), p. 54, n 22 (“The very institution of public prosecution is largely an American invention”).

  8. 8.

    Because of the Dutch influence, the legal system of England was not adopted wholesale (see below Sect. 4.1.2).

  9. 9.

    Kress (1976), p. 100; National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 6.

  10. 10.

    Cardenas (1986), p. 366; Reiss (1975), p. 4. Although a crime was predominantly seen as a private matter, it was also considered as an offense against the peace of the state (Ma 2008, pp. 191–192).

  11. 11.

    Friedman (1993), p. 29. National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 6. See generally Sidman (1976).

  12. 12.

    Devlin (1958), p. 5.

  13. 13.

    John Langbein traces the origins of public prosecution in England to the Marian Statutes of 1554 and 1555. (Langbein 1973, p. 318; see also Langbein 1974, pp. 34–45). Jack Kress has suggested that the justices of the peace were “firmly established by the time of the American colonization,” and that “the appearance of a separate public prosecutor in the colonies might be explained as a fairly logical next step, that is, a pragmatic division of the separate magisterial and prosecutorial functions” (Kress 1976, p. 102). In fact, in Maryland, for instance, the district attorney seems to have evolved from the “clerk of indictments”. This position was created in Maryland in 1683 (Carr 1987, pp. 281–285; see Rice 1996, p. 467). For a more detailed discussion on the influence of the clerk of indictments might have had on the American public prosecutor, see Shoemaker (2005), pp. 351–352.

  14. 14.

    Devlin (1958), p. 5.

  15. 15.

    Langbein (1973), pp. 317–324.

  16. 16.

    Langbein (1974), p. 35; Devlin (1958), p. 6.

  17. 17.

    In the same sense, police prosecutions are private prosecutions as well (Cardenas 1986, p. 364; Devlin 1958, p. 20).

  18. 18.

    Cardenas (1986), pp. 359–360; National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 6; Jacoby (1980), p. 8; Goldstein (2002), p. 1242.

  19. 19.

    Devlin (1958), p. 20.

  20. 20.

    Nolle prosequi is a Latin legal phrase meaning “be unwilling to pursue” and had existed in England since the sixteenth century (Goldstein 1981, p. 12).

  21. 21.

    Goldstein (2002), p. 1242; Goldstein (1981), pp. 12–15; National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 6.

  22. 22.

    Devlin (1958), p. 21; Goldstein (2002), p. 1242; Goldstein (1981), p. 12.

  23. 23.

    Kress (1976), p. 100; Carr (1987), p. 285. For the history of the Prosecution of Offences Act that has established the English Director of Public Prosecutions, see Kurland and Waters (1959).

  24. 24.

    See Records of the States of the United States of America 1650–1715, reel I (Connecticut, B) 195–196; National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 7. Van Alstyne suggests that the Dutch tradition and practice might have influenced the creation of the public prosecutor in Connecticut (van Alstyne 1952, p. 136). However, it seems that the statute reflects the views of English Puritans rather than the civilian jurists (see Shoemaker 2005, pp. 344–346).

  25. 25.

    See e.g. Reiss (1975), p. 5; Lois Carr stated that “the creation of this office was a departure from contemporary English precedent” (Carr 1987, p. 285).

  26. 26.

    W. Scott Van Alstyne, Jr. pioneered this thesis. For a discussion on the actual position of the Public Prosecution Service in the Netherlands, see Blom and Smit (2006).

  27. 27.

    The schout corresponds to the Schultheiss in medieval Germany. As executive official of the ruler, it was his duty to order his assigned village to pay the taxes.

  28. 28.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 14; van Alstyne (1952), pp. 129–131 and 133–135; Kress (1976), p. 104.

  29. 29.

    Goldstein (2002), p. 1243; van Alstyne (1952), pp. 129–130; Kress (1976), p. 104; Jacoby (1980), pp. 12–14. New Netherland covered an area which today is Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware. For more information on New Netherland, see Jacobs (2005).

  30. 30.

    The first schout to appear as prosecutor in a criminal trial was Cornelius Van Tienhoven (van Alstyne 1952, p. 131).

  31. 31.

    van Alstyne (1952), p. 133.

  32. 32.

    van Alstyne (1952), pp. 132–137; Goldstein (2002), p. 1243.

  33. 33.

    van Alstyne (1952), pp. 132–137; Jacoby (1980), p. 14.

  34. 34.

    Kress (1976), p. 104.

  35. 35.

    Julis Goebel and Thomas Raymond Naughton state that there are other possible models for the American public prosecutor than the Dutch schout (Goebel and Naughton 1970, p. 332). The New York legislature sees the district attorney as well as extension of the English Attorney General [see e.g. Spielman Motor Sales Co, Inc., v. Dodge, 295 U.S. 89, 92 (1935)].

  36. 36.

    See Poserina (1959), p. 83.

  37. 37.

    For a discussion of the French Public Prosecution Service in its current state, see Sects. 8.1 and 8.2. See also the contribution of Verrest (2000) and of Aubusson de Cavarlay (2006).

  38. 38.

    Esmein (1882), p. 101; Esmein (1913), p. 115; Sheehan (1975), p. 15.

  39. 39.

    Langbein (1974), p. 217.

  40. 40.

    Sheehan (1975), p. 15.

  41. 41.

    Wright (1928), pp. 329–330; Sheehan (1975), p. 15. See also Robinson (1968), p. 310. The inquisitorial system was confirmed in a ordinance of 1670 (Esmein 1882, pp. 177–283).

  42. 42.

    Wright (1928), p. 329.

  43. 43.

    Langbein (1974), p. 225. See Esmein (1882), pp. 136–174.

  44. 44.

    Verrest (2000), p. 211.

  45. 45.

    French Louisiana originally covered an expansive territory that included most of the drainage basin of the Mississippi River and stretched from the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico and from the Appalachian Mountains to the Rocky Mountains. For a detailed history of Louisiana, see Martin (1827).

  46. 46.

    Howard (1902), p. 19.

  47. 47.

    Batiza (1958), p. 29; Fernandez (2001), p. 1.

  48. 48.

    A brief description of the Superior Council may be found in Plauché Dart (1919).

  49. 49.

    Levasseur (1996), p. 586. See also Goulka (2002), p. 170.

  50. 50.

    Levasseur (1996), p. 587; Goulka (2002), p. 171.

  51. 51.

    Howard (1902), p. 28; Fernandez (2001), pp. 4–5; Martin (1827), pp. 193–205.

  52. 52.

    Batiza (1958), p. 30; Fernandez (2001), p. 13.

  53. 53.

    Levasseur (1996), p. 590; Fernandez (2001), p. 13; Martin (1827), pp. 205–215.

  54. 54.

    Martin (1827), pp. 287–298.

  55. 55.

    Levasseur (1996), pp. 593–609.

  56. 56.

    Friedman (2005), p. 116; Goulka (2002), p. 173; Lambert (1992), p. 248.

  57. 57.

    Hubert (1959), p. 740 (quoting the Crimes Act of 1805). For a discussion of the meaning of the term “common law of England”, see Hubert (1959), pp. 740–741; Fernandez (2001), p. 32; Goulka (2002), pp. 165–166.

  58. 58.

    Friedman (2005), p. 117; Lambert (1992), p. 248; see also Levasseur (1996), pp. 610–628. For the influence of Spanish law of the Louisiana Civil Code, see Batiza (1958).

  59. 59.

    Lambert (1992), p. 248.

  60. 60.

    Friedman (2005), p. 118; Ma (2008), p. 201; Fernandez (2001), p. 39; On the grand jury in Louisiana’s criminal justice system, see Coffey and Norman (1978).

  61. 61.

    Ma (2008), p. 201.

  62. 62.

    See Esmein (1913), p. 594, n 2. See also Pound (1908), p. 357.

  63. 63.

    The Wickersham Commission is the popular name for the National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement.

  64. 64.

    National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 7.

  65. 65.

    Shoemaker (2005), p. 347; Kress (1976), p. 103; Jacoby (1980), p. 4.

  66. 66.

    Shoemaker (2005), p. 347; Kress (1976), p. 103.

  67. 67.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 4.

  68. 68.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 6–7. See also Worrall (2008), p. 5.

  69. 69.

    Kress (1976), p. 100.

  70. 70.

    The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which is the public prosecution service in England and Wales, was created by the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 and began to operate in 1986. Its head is the Director of Public Prosecutions. Until 2002, the police retained considerable power over prosecutions in England and Wales since the role of the Crown Prosecution Service began only after the police had investigated the case and had decided whether or not to charge a suspect with an offense. The principal duty of the Crown Prosecution Service was to review the files of cases in which it has been decided to prosecute. Following the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the decision to charge an individual with an offense has become a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service in all but minor cases. However, about 60 % of charging decisions remain with the police (see House of Commons Justice Committee 2009, p. 10). See generally Lewis (2006).

  71. 71.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 17.

  72. 72.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 10.

  73. 73.

    Wright (1928), p. 329; Jacoby (1980), p. 10. See also Shoemaker (2005), p. 345.

  74. 74.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 8.

  75. 75.

    See Chitwood (1905), pp. 120–121.

  76. 76.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 8. On the Grand Jury, see Sect. 5.5.1.3.2.2, paras 2–8.

  77. 77.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 10 and 16.

  78. 78.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 19.

  79. 79.

    Mallery v. Lane, 1921, 138.

  80. 80.

    See Sect. 3.1.2.5.2 for crime victims’ rights.

  81. 81.

    See Aumann (1940), p. 3.

  82. 82.

    On the legal system in colonial America, see Aumann (1940), pp. 3–18 and 43–63 as well as Chapin (1983). Criminal prosecutions in colonial America were also influenced by the Dutch, the French, and the Scottish legal system. Scottish influence was considerable in some areas of southern colonial America, with the large settlements of immigrants of Scottish origin. Because Scotland in 1587 gave a public prosecutor the authority to prosecute all crimes, it is possible that some colonies may have been influenced by the Scottish system of prosecution when they created public prosecutors (see Robinson 1968, pp. 309–310). For Dutch and French influence, see Sects. 4.1.2 and 4.1.3.

  83. 83.

    British North American colonies experienced a period of “salutary neglect” (1720–1748) during Walpole’s administration. See Speck (1985), pp. 398–401.

  84. 84.

    “The British Government claimed the sole right to create courts, and the early courts except in the charter and proprietary colonies, were created by executive action. However, after the initial settlement, the judiciary received little attention from the King, and colonial courts were left to evolve without much thought, or consideration. England never tried to make the judicial system in the colonies uniform” (Surrency 1967, p. 253).

  85. 85.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 11–13.

  86. 86.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 16.

  87. 87.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 15. It must be noted that both towns were situated near former Dutch settlements.

  88. 88.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 15.

  89. 89.

    Chitwood (1905), pp. 120–121.

  90. 90.

    McCain (1954), p. 18.

  91. 91.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 19–20.

  92. 92.

    For the history of the office of the U.S. attorney, see Beale (2009), pp. 391–413.

  93. 93.

    Beale (2009), p. 392.

  94. 94.

    Judiciary Act of 1789, Section 35 (providing for appointment in each district of an attorney for the United States as well as “attorney general for the United States”).

  95. 95.

    Low Bloch (1989), pp. 585–589.

  96. 96.

    National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 8.

  97. 97.

    Act of August 2, 1861, Chapter 37, 12 Stat. 285.

  98. 98.

    National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931), p. 8; Beale (2009), pp. 396–397.

  99. 99.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 21.

  100. 100.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 23.

  101. 101.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 22–25. Regarding the popular election of judges, see Friedman (2005), pp. 79–91.

  102. 102.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 22.

  103. 103.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 25.

  104. 104.

    Ramsey (2002), p. 1327; Ma (2008), p. 202; Galie (1996), pp. 110–112.

  105. 105.

    Poserina (1959), pp. 83–84.

  106. 106.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 26.

  107. 107.

    In the District of Columbia the U.S. attorney is responsible for the prosecution of both federal and common law offenses.

  108. 108.

    See Appendix IV.

  109. 109.

    On the direct accountability of the public prosecutor to the people as possible control over prosecutorial power, see Sect. 5.5.2.5.

  110. 110.

    Jacoby (1980), p. 29.

  111. 111.

    DeLong and Baker (1933), p. 962, n 147 (quoting Professor Caldwell).

  112. 112.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 23–24.

  113. 113.

    Jacoby (1980), pp. 25–26. Montesquieu’s ideas about separation of powers became the basis for the U.S. Constitution.

  114. 114.

    Similar institutions have existed since the fourteenth century (see Mathias 1999, pp. 14–22). See Sect. 4.1.3 for more information on the history of the French public prosecutor.

  115. 115.

    See generally Jung et al. (2010).

  116. 116.

    For a discussion about which powers to grant to the public prosecutor and the examining magistrate, see Esmein (1913), pp. 500–504.

  117. 117.

    Esmein (1913), pp. 503–504.

  118. 118.

    On the influence of Napoleon in Switzerland, see Sect. 4.2.2.1.

  119. 119.

    See Wohlers (1994), pp. 63–65.

  120. 120.

    For an overview on the examining magistrate’s function and involvement in investigative matters in European criminal justice systems, see Elsner et al. (2008).

  121. 121.

    There are two kinds of investigation—a preliminary inquiry (enquête préliminaire) and an inquiry directly following the commission of a crime (enquête de flagrance).

  122. 122.

    On this stage of the proceedings, see Pradel (1993), pp. 125–126.

  123. 123.

    See Article 79 F-CCP.

  124. 124.

    For the other cases, if after the preliminary investigation the prosecutor decides to prosecute, he has the following options: he may apply for penal order (ordonnance pénale) or summon the suspect directly before the trial court (citation directe).

  125. 125.

    Elsner et al. (2008), p. 232.

  126. 126.

    Elsner et al. (2008), p. 230; Verrest (2000), pp. 213–215.

  127. 127.

    Ministry of Justice (2012), p. 109.

  128. 128.

    Elsner et al. (2008), pp. 230–232.

  129. 129.

    On the implementation of the public prosecutor in Germany, see Wohlers (1994), pp. 43–207. See also Schulz (2005).

  130. 130.

    Fionda (1995), p. 133.

  131. 131.

    Weigend (2005), p. 205. See also Wohlers (1994), p. 63; Mathias (1999), pp. 23–24.

  132. 132.

    Wohlers (1994), pp. 208–215; Mathias (1999), pp. 23–24.

  133. 133.

    Weigend (2005), p. 205.

  134. 134.

    See Mettler (2001), pp. 171–194 for a complete discussion on the history of the public prosecution service in Switzerland.

  135. 135.

    Grab (2003), p. 115.

  136. 136.

    Article 96 of the Helvetic Constitution. For more information, see Lüthi (1923), pp. 4–8.

  137. 137.

    Article 87 of the Helvetic Constitution. For more information, see Lüthi (1923), pp. 8–11.

  138. 138.

    Lüthi (1923), pp. 2–15; Mettler (2001), p. 172.

  139. 139.

    Mettler (2001), pp. 177–178.

  140. 140.

    Mettler (2001), p. 183.

  141. 141.

    Articles 87 and 96 of the Helvetic Constitution.

  142. 142.

    On the different edicts, see Mettler (2001), pp. 176–182.

  143. 143.

    Grab (2003), p. 115.

  144. 144.

    Bühler (2010), pp. 257–258; Trechsel and Killias (2004), p. 246.

  145. 145.

    Mettler (2001), pp. 172–173.

  146. 146.

    Grab (2003), pp. 116–117.

  147. 147.

    Grab (2003), pp. 117–119.

  148. 148.

    Bühler (2010), p. 258.

  149. 149.

    Lüthi (1923), p. 16.

  150. 150.

    So for example in the cantons of Schaffhausen, Schwyz, Basel, Graubünden, Uri, and Solothurn (see Mettler 2001, p. 185 with further references).

  151. 151.

    Mettler (2001), pp. 184–187.

  152. 152.

    Mettler (2001), p. 185.

  153. 153.

    Mettler (2001), pp. 187–188.

  154. 154.

    The Congress of Vienna further guaranteed the Swiss neutrality. Beside Geneva, the cantons of Valais and Neuchâtel were readmitted to the Confederation, so that Switzerland now consisted of 22 cantons (Grab 2003, p. 121).

  155. 155.

    Mettler (2001), pp. 188–189.

  156. 156.

    Mettler (2001), pp. 189–192.

  157. 157.

    See Lüthi (1932), pp. 68–81.

  158. 158.

    Lüthi (1932), p. 80.

  159. 159.

    Lüthi (1932), pp. 80–81.

  160. 160.

    Mettler (2001), pp. 192–193.

  161. 161.

    Mettler (2001), p. 193.

  162. 162.

    On the choice of the “public prosecutor model II”, see Keller. In: Donatsch et al. (2010) Kommentar StPO, Art. 12, Margin Nos. 4–7.

  163. 163.

    Federal Council (2006), p. 1104. The canton of Zug recognized this inquiry model until 2008 and then changed to the “public prosecutor model II”.

  164. 164.

    Federal Council (2006), p. 1104.

  165. 165.

    Federal Council (2006), pp. 1104–1105.

  166. 166.

    The canton of Basel-Land recognized this model for economic crimes only (Federal Council 2006, p. 1105).

  167. 167.

    Federal Council (2006), p. 1105.

  168. 168.

    See Elsner et al. (2008), pp. 226–233.

  169. 169.

    In 2009, the Conseil supérieur de la magistrature sentenced the examining magistrate with a réprimand avec inscription au dossier, the lowest penalty in the French judiciary system. For more information about disciplinary liability of French prosecutors, see Sect. 8.5.2.2.

  170. 170.

    A summary of this case can be found in Grometstein (2008), pp. 19–20.

  171. 171.

    Steiner (2010), p. 239.

References

  • Aubusson de Cavarlay B (2006) The prosecution service function within the French criminal justice system. In: Jehle J, Wade M (eds) Coping with overloaded criminal justice systems. The rise of prosecutorial power across Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp 185–205

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Aumann FR (1940) The changing American legal system: some selected phrases. The Ohio State University, Columbus

    Google Scholar 

  • Batiza R (1958) The influence of Spanish law in Louisiana. Tulane Law Rev 33:29–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Beale SS (2009) Rethinking the identity and role of the United States Attorneys. Ohio State J Crim Law 6:369–440

    Google Scholar 

  • Blom M, Smit P (2006) The prosecution service function within the Dutch criminal justice system. In: Jehle J, Wade M (eds) Coping with overloaded criminal justice systems. The rise of prosecutorial power across Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp 237–256

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bühler T (2010) Schweizerische Rechtsquellen und Schweizerische Verfassungsgeschichte nach einer Vorlesung von Ulrich Stutz (1868–1932). Dike, Zurich

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardenas J (1986) The crime victim in the prosecutorial process. Harv J Law Public Policy 9:357–398

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr LG (1987) County government in Maryland. 1689–1709. American legal and constitutional history. A Garland series of outstanding dissertations. Garland, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapin B (1983) Criminal justice in Colonial America, 1606–1660. University of Georgia Press, Athens

    Google Scholar 

  • Chitwood OP (1905) Justice in Colonial Virginia. John Hopkins Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey MA, Norman JB (1978) Selected problems of the Louisiana grand jury. Tulane Law Rev 52:707–768

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLong EH, Baker NF (1933) The prosecuting attorney – provisions of law organizing the office. J Crim Law Criminol 23:926–963

    Google Scholar 

  • Devlin PB (1958) The criminal prosecution in England. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Donatsch A, Hansjakob T, Lieber V (eds) (2010) Kommentar zur Schweizerischen Strafprozessordnung (StPO) (Kommentar StPO). Schulthess, Zurich

    Google Scholar 

  • Elsner B, Aubusson de Cavarlay B, Smit P (2008) The examining magistrate’s function and involvement in investigative matters. Eur J Crim Policy Res 14(2–3):225–235

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esmein A (1882) Histoire de la procédure criminelle en France: et spécialement de la procédure inquisitoire, depuis le XIII siècle à nos jours. L. Larose et Forcel, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Esmein A (1913) A history of continental criminal procedure. With special reference to France. Little Brown, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Council (2006) Message from the Federal Council of December 21, 2005 on the unification of criminal procedure [Botschaft des Bundesrates zur Vereinheitlichung des Strafprozessrechts vom 21. Dezember 2005]. Federal Chancellery, Berne

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez MF (2001) From chaos to continuity. The evolution of Louisiana’s judicial system, 1712–1862. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge

    Google Scholar 

  • Fionda J (1995) Public prosecutors and discretion. A comparative study. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman LM (1993) Crime and punishment in American history. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman LM (2005) A history of American law, a Touchstone book, 3rd edn. Simon & Schuster, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Galie PJ (1996) Ordered liberty. A constitutional history of New York. Fordham University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gittler J (1984) Expanding the role of the victim in a criminal action: an overview of issues and problems. Pepperdine Law Rev 11:117–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Goebel J, Naughton TR (1970) Law enforcement in Colonial New York. A study in criminal procedure (1664–1776). Patterson Smith reprint series in criminology, law enforcement, and social problems, publication no. 122. Patterson Smith, Montclair

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein AS (1976) Prosecution: history of the public prosecutor. In: Encyclopedia of crime and justice, vol 3. The Free Press, New York, pp 1287–1290

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein AS (1981) The passive judiciary. Prosecutorial discretion and the guilty plea. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein AS (2002) Prosecution: history of the public prosecutor. In: Dressler J (ed) Encyclopedia of crime and justice, vol 3, 2nd edn. Macmillan Reference USA, New York, pp 1242–1246

    Google Scholar 

  • Goulka JE (2002) The first constitutional right to criminal appeal. Louisiana’s constitution of 1845 and the clash of the common law and natural law traditions. Tulane Eur Civ Law Forum 17:151–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Grab AI (2003) Napoleon and the transformation of Europe. European history in perspective. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Grometstein R (2008) Wrongful convictions and moral panic: national and international perspectives on organized child sexual abuse. In: Huff CR, Killias M (eds) Wrongful conviction. International perspectives on miscarriages of justice. Temple University Press, Philadelphia, pp 11–32

    Google Scholar 

  • House of Commons Justice Committee (2009) The crown prosecution service. Gatekeeper of the criminal justice system: ninth report of session 2008–2009: report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. Stationery Office, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard JQ (1902) History of the Louisiana purchase. Callaghan & Company, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubert LD (1959) History of Louisiana criminal procedure. Tulane Law Rev 33:739–750

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs JA (2005) New Netherland. A Dutch Colony in seventeenth-century America. Brill, Leiden

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby JE (1980) The American prosecutor. A search for identity. Lexington Books, Lexington

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung H, Leblois-Happe J, Witz C (eds) (2010) 200 Jahre Code d’Instruction Criminelle – Le Bicentenaire du Code d’Instruction Criminelle. Nomos, Baden-Baden

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress JM (1976) Progress and prosecution. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 423:99–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurland PB, Waters DWM (1959) Public prosecutions in England, 1854–1879: an essay in English legislative history. Duke Law J 8:493–562

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambert KA (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 Rev 67:231–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Langbein JH (1973) The origins of public prosecution at common law. Am J Leg Hist 17:313–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langbein JH (1974) Prosecuting crime in the renaissance. England, Germany, France. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levasseur AA (1996) The major periods of Louisiana legal history. Loyola Law Rev 41:585–628

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis C (2006) The prosecution service function within the English criminal justice system. In: Jehle J, Wade M (eds) Coping with overloaded criminal justice systems. The rise of prosecutorial power across Europe. Springer, Berlin, pp 151–184

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Low Bloch S (1989) The early role of the attorney general in our constitutional scheme: in the beginning there was pragmatic. Duke Law J 38:561–653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lüthi W (1923) Die schweizerische Bundesanwaltschaft. Diss, Berne

    Google Scholar 

  • Lüthi W (1932) Regenerationsbewegung und eidgenössische Strafrechtspflege. Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Strafrecht 46:61–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma Y (2008) Exploring the origins of public prosecution. Int Crim Justice Rev 18:190–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin F (1827) The history of Louisiana from the earliest period. Lyman & Beardslee, New Orleans

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathias E (1999) Les Procureurs du droit. De l’impartialité du ministère public en France et en Allemagne. CNRS, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • McCain PM (1954) The county court in North Carolina before 1750. Duke University Press, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  • Mettler C (2001) Staatsanwaltschaft. Position innerhalb der Gewaltentrias, Funktion im Strafprozess und aufsichtsrechtliche Situation sowie ein Vorschlag zur Neuordnung. Grundlegendes Recht, vol 1. Helbing & Lichtenhahn, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller FW (1970) Prosecution: the decision to charge a suspect with a crime. Little Brown, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Justice (2012) Statistical yearbook of the justice system 2011–2012 [Annuaire Statistique de la justice 2011–2012]. Ministry of Justice, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • National Commission on Law Observance and Enforcement (1931) Report on prosecution. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Plauché Dart H (1919) The legal institutions of Louisiana. La Hist Q 2:72–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Poserina JJ (1959) Appointed attorney general’s power to supersede an elected district attorney. Temple Law Q 33:78–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Pound R (1908) The influence of French law in America. Ill Law Rev 3:354–363

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradel J (1993) France. In: van Wyngaert C (ed) Criminal procedure systems in the European community. Butterworths, London, pp 105–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey CB (2002) The discretionary power of “Public” prosecutors in historical perspective. Am Crim Law Rev 39:1309–1393

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss AJ (1975) Public prosecutors and criminal prosecution in the United States of America. Juridical Rev New Ser 20:1–21

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice JD (1996) The criminal trial before and after the lawyers. Am J Leg Hist 40:455–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson TJ (1968) Private prosecution in criminal cases. Wake Forest Law Rev 4:300–327

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz L (2005) Die Teilung der erkennenden Gewalt. Zur Einführung der Staatsanwaltschaft in Deutschland. In: Durand B et al (eds) Staatsanwaltschaft. Europäische und amerikanische Geschichten. Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main, pp 311–338

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheehan AV (1975) Criminal procedure in Scotland and France. A comparative study, with particular emphasis on the role of the public prosecutor. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoemaker KB (2005) Reflections on the birth of official criminal prosecutions in American Law. In: Durand B et al (eds) Staatsanwaltschaft. Europäische und amerikanische Geschichten. Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main, pp 339–355

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidman A (1976) The outmoded concept of private prosecution. Am Univ Law Rev 25:756–762

    Google Scholar 

  • Speck W (1985) The international and imperial context. In: Greene JP, Pole JR (eds) Colonial British America. Essays in the new history of the early modern era [based on papers presented at a conference held at St. Catherine’s College, Oxford, August 1–7. 1981], 2nd edn. Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 384–407

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiner E (2010) French law. A comparative approach. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Surrency EC (1967) The courts in the American colonies. Am J Leg Hist 11:253–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trechsel S, Killias M (2004) Criminal law. In: Dessemontet F, Ansay T (eds) Introduction to Swiss law, 3rd edn. Kluwer Law International [sold and distributed in North Central and South America by Aspen Publishers], Frederick, pp 245–268

    Google Scholar 

  • van Alstyne WS (1952) The district attorney – a historical puzzle. Wis Law Rev 11:125–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Verrest P (2000) The French public prosecution service. Eur J Crime Crim Law Crim Justice 8:210–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Weigend T (2005) The prosecution service in the German administration of criminal justice. In: Tak PJP (ed) Tasks and powers of the prosecution services in the EU member states, vol 1. Wolf Legal Publishers, Nijmegen, pp 203–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlers W (1994) Entstehung und Funktion der Staatsanwaltschaft. Ein Beitrag zu den rechtshistorischen und strukturellen Grundlagen des reformierten Strafverfahrens. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Worrall JL (2008) Prosecution in America: a historical and comparative account. In: Worrall JL, Nugent-Borakove ME (eds) The changing role of the American prosecutor. State University of New York Press, Albany, pp 3–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright AC (1928) French criminal procedure. Law Q Rev 44:324–343

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rechtswissenschaftliche Fakultät, Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz, Brig, Switzerland

    Gwladys Gilliéron

Authors
  1. Gwladys Gilliéron
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gilliéron, G. (2014). History of the Public Prosecutor. In: Public Prosecutors in the United States and Europe. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04504-7_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation