Police and prosecutors are also directly influenced

many judges are interested in providing the most innovative and up-to-date care possible. Police and
prosecutors are also directly influenced by the judge, whose sentencing discretion affects the arrest
and charging processes. For example, if a judge usually chooses minimal sentences—such as a fine
for a particular offense—the police may be reluctant to arrest offenders for that crime, knowing that
doing so will basically be a waste of time. Similarly, if a judge is known to have an open attitude
toward police discretion, the local department may be more inclined to engage in practices that
border on entrapment or to pursue cases through easily obtained wiretaps. However, a magistrate
oriented toward strict use of due process guarantees would stifle such activities by dismissing all
cases involving apparent police abuses of personal freedoms. The district attorney’s office may also
be sensitive to judicial attitudes. The district attorney might forgo indictments in cases that the
presiding magistrate expressly considers trivial or quasi-criminal and in which the judge has been
known to take only token action, such as the prosecution of pornographers. Finally, the judge
considers requests by police and prosecutors for leniency (or severity) in sentencing. The judge’s
reaction to these requests is important if the police and the district attorney are to honor the bargains

they may have made with defendants to secure information, cooperation, or guilty pleas. For
example, when police tell informers that they will try to convince the judge to go easy on them to
secure required information, they will often discuss the terms of the promised leniency with
representatives of the court. If a judge ignores police demands, the department’s bargaining power is
severely diminished, and communication within the criminal justice system is impaired. There is
always concern that judges will discriminate against defendants on the basis of their gender, race, or
class. Although this issue is of great social concern, most research efforts have failed to find
consistent bias in judicial decision making. Judges tend to dismiss cases that they consider weak and
less serious.19
Judicial Qualifications
The qualifications for appointment to one of the existing 30,000 judgeships vary from state to state
and court to court. Typically, the potential judge must be a resident of the state, licensed to practice
law, a member of the state bar association, and at least 25 and less than 70 years of age. However, a
significant degree of diversity exists in the basic qualifications, depending on the level of court juris-
diction. Although almost every state requires judges to have a law degree if they are to serve on
appellate courts or courts of general jurisdiction, it is not uncommon for municipal or town court
judges to lack a legal background, even though they have the power to incarcerate criminal
defendants. Judges are held in high esteem, but they must sacrifice many financial benefits if they
shift careers from lucrative private practices to low-paid government positions. Although an average